Cargando…

Ventilatory Effects of Isoflurane Sedation via the Sedaconda ACD-S versus ACD-L: A Substudy of a Randomized Trial

Devices used to deliver inhaled sedation increase dead space ventilation. We therefore compared ventilatory effects among isoflurane sedation via the Sedaconda ACD-S (internal volume: 50 mL), isoflurane sedation via the Sedaconda ACD-L (100 mL), and propofol sedation with standard mechanical ventila...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Müller-Wirtz, Lukas M., Becher, Tobias, Günther, Ulf, Bellgardt, Martin, Sackey, Peter, Volk, Thomas, Meiser, Andreas
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10179426/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37176754
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12093314
_version_ 1785041095183302656
author Müller-Wirtz, Lukas M.
Becher, Tobias
Günther, Ulf
Bellgardt, Martin
Sackey, Peter
Volk, Thomas
Meiser, Andreas
author_facet Müller-Wirtz, Lukas M.
Becher, Tobias
Günther, Ulf
Bellgardt, Martin
Sackey, Peter
Volk, Thomas
Meiser, Andreas
author_sort Müller-Wirtz, Lukas M.
collection PubMed
description Devices used to deliver inhaled sedation increase dead space ventilation. We therefore compared ventilatory effects among isoflurane sedation via the Sedaconda ACD-S (internal volume: 50 mL), isoflurane sedation via the Sedaconda ACD-L (100 mL), and propofol sedation with standard mechanical ventilation with heat and moisture exchangers (HME). This is a substudy of a randomized trial that compared inhaled isoflurane sedation via the ACD-S or ACD-L to intravenous propofol sedation in 301 intensive care patients. Data from the first 24 h after study inclusion were analyzed using linear mixed models. Primary outcome was minute ventilation. Secondary outcomes were tidal volume, respiratory rate, arterial carbon dioxide pressure, and isoflurane consumption. In total, 151 patients were randomized to propofol and 150 to isoflurane sedation; 64 patients received isoflurane via the ACD-S and 86 patients via the ACD-L. While use of the ACD-L was associated with higher minute ventilation (average difference (95% confidence interval): 1.3 (0.7, 1.8) L/min, p < 0.001), higher tidal volumes (44 (16, 72) mL, p = 0.002), higher respiratory rates (1.2 (0.1, 2.2) breaths/min, p = 0.025), and higher arterial carbon dioxide pressures (3.4 (1.2, 5.6) mmHg, p = 0.002), use of the ACD-S did not significantly affect ventilation compared to standard mechanical ventilation and sedation. Isoflurane consumption was slightly less with the ACD-L compared to the ACD-S (−0.7 (−1.3, 0.1) mL/h, p = 0.022). The Sedaconda ACD-S compared to the ACD-L is associated with reduced minute ventilation and does not significantly affect ventilation compared to a standard mechanical ventilation and sedation setting. The smaller ACD-S is therefore the device of choice to minimize impact on ventilation, especially in patients with a limited ability to compensate (e.g., COPD patients). Volatile anesthetic consumption is slightly higher with the ACD-S compared to the ACD-L.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10179426
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101794262023-05-13 Ventilatory Effects of Isoflurane Sedation via the Sedaconda ACD-S versus ACD-L: A Substudy of a Randomized Trial Müller-Wirtz, Lukas M. Becher, Tobias Günther, Ulf Bellgardt, Martin Sackey, Peter Volk, Thomas Meiser, Andreas J Clin Med Article Devices used to deliver inhaled sedation increase dead space ventilation. We therefore compared ventilatory effects among isoflurane sedation via the Sedaconda ACD-S (internal volume: 50 mL), isoflurane sedation via the Sedaconda ACD-L (100 mL), and propofol sedation with standard mechanical ventilation with heat and moisture exchangers (HME). This is a substudy of a randomized trial that compared inhaled isoflurane sedation via the ACD-S or ACD-L to intravenous propofol sedation in 301 intensive care patients. Data from the first 24 h after study inclusion were analyzed using linear mixed models. Primary outcome was minute ventilation. Secondary outcomes were tidal volume, respiratory rate, arterial carbon dioxide pressure, and isoflurane consumption. In total, 151 patients were randomized to propofol and 150 to isoflurane sedation; 64 patients received isoflurane via the ACD-S and 86 patients via the ACD-L. While use of the ACD-L was associated with higher minute ventilation (average difference (95% confidence interval): 1.3 (0.7, 1.8) L/min, p < 0.001), higher tidal volumes (44 (16, 72) mL, p = 0.002), higher respiratory rates (1.2 (0.1, 2.2) breaths/min, p = 0.025), and higher arterial carbon dioxide pressures (3.4 (1.2, 5.6) mmHg, p = 0.002), use of the ACD-S did not significantly affect ventilation compared to standard mechanical ventilation and sedation. Isoflurane consumption was slightly less with the ACD-L compared to the ACD-S (−0.7 (−1.3, 0.1) mL/h, p = 0.022). The Sedaconda ACD-S compared to the ACD-L is associated with reduced minute ventilation and does not significantly affect ventilation compared to a standard mechanical ventilation and sedation setting. The smaller ACD-S is therefore the device of choice to minimize impact on ventilation, especially in patients with a limited ability to compensate (e.g., COPD patients). Volatile anesthetic consumption is slightly higher with the ACD-S compared to the ACD-L. MDPI 2023-05-06 /pmc/articles/PMC10179426/ /pubmed/37176754 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12093314 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Müller-Wirtz, Lukas M.
Becher, Tobias
Günther, Ulf
Bellgardt, Martin
Sackey, Peter
Volk, Thomas
Meiser, Andreas
Ventilatory Effects of Isoflurane Sedation via the Sedaconda ACD-S versus ACD-L: A Substudy of a Randomized Trial
title Ventilatory Effects of Isoflurane Sedation via the Sedaconda ACD-S versus ACD-L: A Substudy of a Randomized Trial
title_full Ventilatory Effects of Isoflurane Sedation via the Sedaconda ACD-S versus ACD-L: A Substudy of a Randomized Trial
title_fullStr Ventilatory Effects of Isoflurane Sedation via the Sedaconda ACD-S versus ACD-L: A Substudy of a Randomized Trial
title_full_unstemmed Ventilatory Effects of Isoflurane Sedation via the Sedaconda ACD-S versus ACD-L: A Substudy of a Randomized Trial
title_short Ventilatory Effects of Isoflurane Sedation via the Sedaconda ACD-S versus ACD-L: A Substudy of a Randomized Trial
title_sort ventilatory effects of isoflurane sedation via the sedaconda acd-s versus acd-l: a substudy of a randomized trial
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10179426/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37176754
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12093314
work_keys_str_mv AT mullerwirtzlukasm ventilatoryeffectsofisofluranesedationviathesedacondaacdsversusacdlasubstudyofarandomizedtrial
AT bechertobias ventilatoryeffectsofisofluranesedationviathesedacondaacdsversusacdlasubstudyofarandomizedtrial
AT guntherulf ventilatoryeffectsofisofluranesedationviathesedacondaacdsversusacdlasubstudyofarandomizedtrial
AT bellgardtmartin ventilatoryeffectsofisofluranesedationviathesedacondaacdsversusacdlasubstudyofarandomizedtrial
AT sackeypeter ventilatoryeffectsofisofluranesedationviathesedacondaacdsversusacdlasubstudyofarandomizedtrial
AT volkthomas ventilatoryeffectsofisofluranesedationviathesedacondaacdsversusacdlasubstudyofarandomizedtrial
AT meiserandreas ventilatoryeffectsofisofluranesedationviathesedacondaacdsversusacdlasubstudyofarandomizedtrial