Cargando…

Ultra-protective tidal volume: how low should we go?

Applying tidal volumes of less than 6 mL/kg might improve lung protection in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. In a recent article, Retamal and colleagues showed that such a reduction is feasible with conventional mechanical ventilation and leads to less tidal recruitment and overdi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Costa, Eduardo LV, Amato, Marcelo BP
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3672527/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23551995
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc12556
_version_ 1782272117786542080
author Costa, Eduardo LV
Amato, Marcelo BP
author_facet Costa, Eduardo LV
Amato, Marcelo BP
author_sort Costa, Eduardo LV
collection PubMed
description Applying tidal volumes of less than 6 mL/kg might improve lung protection in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. In a recent article, Retamal and colleagues showed that such a reduction is feasible with conventional mechanical ventilation and leads to less tidal recruitment and overdistension without causing carbon dioxide retention or auto-positive end-expiratory pressure. However, whether the compensatory increase in the respiratory rate blunts the lung protection remains unestablished.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3672527
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-36725272014-03-28 Ultra-protective tidal volume: how low should we go? Costa, Eduardo LV Amato, Marcelo BP Crit Care Commentary Applying tidal volumes of less than 6 mL/kg might improve lung protection in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. In a recent article, Retamal and colleagues showed that such a reduction is feasible with conventional mechanical ventilation and leads to less tidal recruitment and overdistension without causing carbon dioxide retention or auto-positive end-expiratory pressure. However, whether the compensatory increase in the respiratory rate blunts the lung protection remains unestablished. BioMed Central 2013 2013-03-28 /pmc/articles/PMC3672527/ /pubmed/23551995 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc12556 Text en Copyright © 2013 BioMed Central Ltd
spellingShingle Commentary
Costa, Eduardo LV
Amato, Marcelo BP
Ultra-protective tidal volume: how low should we go?
title Ultra-protective tidal volume: how low should we go?
title_full Ultra-protective tidal volume: how low should we go?
title_fullStr Ultra-protective tidal volume: how low should we go?
title_full_unstemmed Ultra-protective tidal volume: how low should we go?
title_short Ultra-protective tidal volume: how low should we go?
title_sort ultra-protective tidal volume: how low should we go?
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3672527/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23551995
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc12556
work_keys_str_mv AT costaeduardolv ultraprotectivetidalvolumehowlowshouldwego
AT amatomarcelobp ultraprotectivetidalvolumehowlowshouldwego