Optimizing Positive End-Expiratory Pressure Based on Intra-Abdominal Pressure in Patients with Acute Respiratory Failure.
Journal
Nigerian journal of clinical practice
ISSN: 1119-3077
Titre abrégé: Niger J Clin Pract
Pays: India
ID NLM: 101150032
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Aug 2024
01 Aug 2024
Historique:
received:
02
02
2024
accepted:
24
07
2024
medline:
31
8
2024
pubmed:
31
8
2024
entrez:
30
8
2024
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) is a crucial component of mechanical ventilation to improve oxygenation in critically ill patients with respiratory failure. The interaction between abdominal and thoracic compartment pressures is known well. Especially in intra-abdominal hypertension, lower PEEP may cause atelectotrauma by repetitive opening and closing of alveoli. In this study, it was aimed to investigate the effect of PEEP adjustment according to the intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) on oxygenation and clarify possible harms. Patients older than 18 were mechanically ventilated due to hypoxemic respiratory failure and had normal IAP (<15 mmHg) included in the study. Patients with severe cardiovascular dysfunction were excluded. The following PEEP levels were applied: PEEPzero of 0 cmH2O, PEEPIAP/2 = 50% of IAP, and PEEPIAP = 100% of IAP. After a 30-minute equilibration period, arterial blood gases and mean arterial pressures were measured. One hundred thirty-eight patients (mean age 66.5 ± 15.9, 56.5% male) enrolled on the study. The mean IAP was 9.8 ± 3.4. Seventy-nine percent of the patients' PaO2/FiO2 ratio was under 300 mmHg. Figure 1 shows the change in PaO2/FiO2 ratio, PaCO2, PPlato, and MAP of the patients according to the PEEP levels. Overall increases were detected in the PaO2/FiO2 ratio (P < 0.001) and Pplato (P < 0.001), while PaCO2 and MAP did not change after increasing PEEP gradually. Pairwise analyses revealed differences in PaO2/FiO2 between PEEPzero (186.4 [85.7-265.8]) and PEEPIAP/2 (207.7 [101.7-292.9]) (t = -0.77, P < 0.001), between baseline and PEEPIAP (236.1 [121.4-351.0]) (t = -1.7, P < 0.001), and between PEEPIAP/2 and PEEPIAP (t = -1.0, P < 0.001). Plato pressures were in the safe range (<30 cmH2O) at all three PEEP levels (PEEPzero = 12 [10-15], PEEPIAP/2 = 15 [13-18], PEEPIAP = 17 [14-22]). In patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and mechanically ventilated, PEEP adjustment according to the IAB improves oxygenation, especially in the settings of the limited source where other PEEP titration methods are absent.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) is a crucial component of mechanical ventilation to improve oxygenation in critically ill patients with respiratory failure. The interaction between abdominal and thoracic compartment pressures is known well. Especially in intra-abdominal hypertension, lower PEEP may cause atelectotrauma by repetitive opening and closing of alveoli.
AIM
OBJECTIVE
In this study, it was aimed to investigate the effect of PEEP adjustment according to the intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) on oxygenation and clarify possible harms.
METHOD
METHODS
Patients older than 18 were mechanically ventilated due to hypoxemic respiratory failure and had normal IAP (<15 mmHg) included in the study. Patients with severe cardiovascular dysfunction were excluded. The following PEEP levels were applied: PEEPzero of 0 cmH2O, PEEPIAP/2 = 50% of IAP, and PEEPIAP = 100% of IAP. After a 30-minute equilibration period, arterial blood gases and mean arterial pressures were measured.
RESULTS
RESULTS
One hundred thirty-eight patients (mean age 66.5 ± 15.9, 56.5% male) enrolled on the study. The mean IAP was 9.8 ± 3.4. Seventy-nine percent of the patients' PaO2/FiO2 ratio was under 300 mmHg. Figure 1 shows the change in PaO2/FiO2 ratio, PaCO2, PPlato, and MAP of the patients according to the PEEP levels. Overall increases were detected in the PaO2/FiO2 ratio (P < 0.001) and Pplato (P < 0.001), while PaCO2 and MAP did not change after increasing PEEP gradually. Pairwise analyses revealed differences in PaO2/FiO2 between PEEPzero (186.4 [85.7-265.8]) and PEEPIAP/2 (207.7 [101.7-292.9]) (t = -0.77, P < 0.001), between baseline and PEEPIAP (236.1 [121.4-351.0]) (t = -1.7, P < 0.001), and between PEEPIAP/2 and PEEPIAP (t = -1.0, P < 0.001). Plato pressures were in the safe range (<30 cmH2O) at all three PEEP levels (PEEPzero = 12 [10-15], PEEPIAP/2 = 15 [13-18], PEEPIAP = 17 [14-22]).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
In patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and mechanically ventilated, PEEP adjustment according to the IAB improves oxygenation, especially in the settings of the limited source where other PEEP titration methods are absent.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39212442
doi: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_103_24
pii: 01253091-202427080-00016
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1033-1037Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2024 Copyright: © 2024 Nigerian Journal of Clinical Practice.
Références
Fan E, Del Sorbo L, Goligher EC, Hodgson CL, Munshi L, Walkey AJ, et al. An Official American Thoracic Society/European Society of Intensive Care Medicine/Society of Critical Care Medicine Clinical Practice Guideline: Mechanical ventilation in adult patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2017;195:1253–63.
Millington SJ, Cardinal P, Brochard L. Setting and titrating positive end-expiratory pressure. Chest 2022;161:1566–75.
El-Khatib MF, Chatburn RL. Selecting optimum positive end-expiratory pressure: Seeing the forest instead of the trees*. Crit Care Med 2013;41:2050–1.
Hess DR. Recruitment maneuvers and PEEP titration. Respir Care 2015;60:1688–704.
Regli A, Ahmadi-Noorbakhsh S, Musk GC, Reese DJ, Herrmann P, Firth MJ, et al. Computed tomographic assessment of lung aeration at different positive end-expiratory pressures in a porcine model of intra-abdominal hypertension and lung injury. Intensive Care Med Exp 2021;9:52.
Fiedler MO, Deutsch BL, Simeliunas E, Diktanaite D, Harms A, Brune M, et al. Effect of moderate elevated intra-abdominal pressure on lung mechanics and histological lung injury at different positive end-expiratory pressures. PLoS One 2020;15:e0230830.
Fiedler MO, Simeliunas E, Deutsch BL, Diktanaite D, Harms A, Brune M, et al. Impact of different positive end-expiratory pressures on lung mechanics in the setting of moderately elevated intra-abdominal pressure and acute lung injury in a porcine model. J Clin Med 2021;10:306.
Suwanvanichkij V, Curtis JR. The use of high positive end-expiratory pressure for respiratory failure in abdominal compartment syndrome. Respir Care 2004;49:286–90.
Krebs J, Pelosi P, Tsagogiorgas C, Alb M, Luecke T. Effects of positive end-expiratory pressure on respiratory function and hemodynamics in patients with acute respiratory failure with and without intra-abdominal hypertension: A pilot study. Crit Care 2009;13:R160.
Kirkpatrick AW, Roberts DJ, De Waele J, Jaeschke R, Malbrain ML, De Keulenaer B, et al. Intra-abdominal hypertension and the abdominal compartment syndrome: Updated consensus definitions and clinical practice guidelines from the world society of the abdominal compartment syndrome. Intensive Care Med 2013;39:1190–206.
Rollas K, Hanci P, Topeli A. Effects of end-expiratory lung volume versus PaO (2) guided PEEP determination on respiratory mechanics and oxygenation in moderate to severe ARDS. Exp Lung Res 2022;48:12–22.
Pelosi P, Ball L, Barbas CSV, Bellomo R, Burns KEA, Einav S, et al. Personalized mechanical ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome. Crit Care 2021;25:250.
Scheidt M, Hyatt RE, Rehder K. Effects of rib cage or abdominal restriction on lung mechanics. J Appl Physiol Respir Environ Exerc Physiol 1981;51:1115–21.
Malbrain MLNG, Deeren D, Nieuwendlijk R, Darquennes R, Verbrugghe W, Daelemans R, et al. Partitioning of respiratory mechanics in intra-abdominal hypertension. Intensive Care Med 2003;29:S85.
Brower RG, Matthay MA, Morris A, Schoenfeld D, Thompson BT, Wheeler A. Ventilation with lower tidal volumes as compared with traditional tidal volumes for acute lung injury and the acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med 2000;342:1301–8.