Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 1993 Sep;104(3):871-5.
doi: 10.1378/chest.104.3.871.

Cardiorespiratory effects of pressure-controlled ventilation with and without inverse ratio in the adult respiratory distress syndrome

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Cardiorespiratory effects of pressure-controlled ventilation with and without inverse ratio in the adult respiratory distress syndrome

A Mercat et al. Chest. 1993 Sep.

Abstract

To assess the cardiorespiratory effects of pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) and pressure-controlled inverse ratio ventilation (PC-IRV), we compared pressure-controlled ventilation with an inspiratory-to-expiratory time ratio (I/E) of 1/2 (PCV) and of 2/1 (PC-IRV) to volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) with an I/E of 1/2 in 10 patients suffering from the adult respiratory distress syndrome. In all modes, the inspiratory oxygen fraction, tidal volume, respiratory rate, and total positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEPt = applied PEEP + intrinsic PEEP) were kept constant. Each ventilatory mode was applied for 1 h in a randomized order. No significant differences in PaO2 were observed among the three modes. The PaCO2 was lower (p < 0.05) in PC-IRV (39 +/- 4 mm Hg) than in PCV (43 +/- 5 mm Hg) and in VCV (45 +/- 5 mm Hg). The peak airway pressure was significantly lower in PC-IRV than in PCV (p < 0.05) and in PCV than in VCV (p < 0.05), but plateau pressure was not different in the 3 modes. The mean airway pressure (mPaw) was significantly higher (p < 0.05) in PC-IRV (21.4 +/- 0.7 cm H2O) than in PCV (17.1 +/- 0.7 cm H2O) and VCV (16.4 +/- 0.5 cm H2O). As a consequence of this increased mPaw, PC-IRV induced a decrease in cardiac index (CI) (3.3 +/- 0.2 vs 3.7 +/- 0.2 L/min/m2 in VCV; p < 0.05) and hence in oxygen delivery (DO2) (424 +/- 28 vs 469 +/- 38 ml/min/m2 in VCV; p < 0.05). Our results suggest that neither PCV nor PC-IRV bring any benefit over VCV in terms of arterial oxygenation. Moreover, the increase in mPaw induced by PC-IRV may be deleterious to the CI and DO2.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

LinkOut - more resources