Cargando…

“Low-” versus “high”-frequency oscillation and right ventricular function in ARDS. A randomized crossover study

BACKGROUND: Recent, large trials of high-frequency oscillation (HFO) versus conventional ventilation (CV) in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) reported negative results. This could be explained by an HFO-induced right ventricular (RV) dysfunction/failure due to high intrathoracic pressures...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mentzelopoulos, Spyros D., Anninos, Hector, Malachias, Sotirios, Zakynthinos, Spyros G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6122746/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30202530
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40560-018-0327-3
_version_ 1783352717258784768
author Mentzelopoulos, Spyros D.
Anninos, Hector
Malachias, Sotirios
Zakynthinos, Spyros G.
author_facet Mentzelopoulos, Spyros D.
Anninos, Hector
Malachias, Sotirios
Zakynthinos, Spyros G.
author_sort Mentzelopoulos, Spyros D.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Recent, large trials of high-frequency oscillation (HFO) versus conventional ventilation (CV) in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) reported negative results. This could be explained by an HFO-induced right ventricular (RV) dysfunction/failure due to high intrathoracic pressures and hypercapnia. We hypothesized that HFO strategies aimed at averting/attenuating hypercapnia, such as “low-frequency” (i.e., 4 Hz) HFO and 4-Hz HFO with tracheal-gas insufflation (HFO-TGI), may result in an improved RV function relative to “high-frequency” (i.e., 7 Hz) HFO (which may promote hypercapnia) and similar RV function relative to lung protective CV. METHODS: We studied 17 patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS [PaO(2)-to-inspiratory O(2) fraction ratio (PaO(2)/FiO(2)) < 150]. RV function was assessed by transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). Patients received 60 min of CV for TEE-guided, positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) “optimization” and subsequent stabilization; 60 min of 4-Hz HFO for “study mean airway pressure (mPaw)” titration to peripheral oxygen saturation ≥ 95%, without worsening RV function as assessed by TEE; 60 min of each tested HFO strategy in random order; and another 60 min of CV using the pre-HFO, TEE-guided PEEP setting. Study measurements (i.e., gas exchange, hemodynamics, and TEE data) were obtained over the last 10 min of pre-HFO CV, of each one of the three tested HFO strategies, and of post-HFO CV. RESULTS: The mean “study HFO mPaw” was 8–10 cmH(2)O higher relative to pre-HFO CV. Seven-Hz HFO versus 4-Hz HFO and 4-Hz HFO-TGI resulted in higher mean ± SD right-to-left ventricular end-diastolic area ratio (RVEDA/LVEDA) (0.64 ± 0.15 versus 0.56 ± 0.14 and 0.52 ± 0.10, respectively, both p < 0.05). Higher diastolic/systolic eccentricity indexes (1.33 ± 0.19/1.42 ± 0.17 versus 1.21 ± 0.10/1.26 ± 0.10 and 1.17 ± 0.11/1.17 ± 0.13, respectively, all p < 0.05). Seven-Hz HFO resulted in 18–28% higher PaCO(2) relative to all other ventilatory strategies (all p < 0.05). Four-Hz HFO-TGI versus pre-HFO CV resulted in 15% lower RVEDA/LVEDA, and 7%/10% lower diastolic/systolic eccentricity indexes (all p < 0.05). Mean PaO(2)/FiO(2) improved by 77–80% during HFO strategies versus CV (all p < 0.05). Mean cardiac index varied by ≤ 10% among strategies. Percent changes in PaCO(2) among strategies were predictive of concurrent percent changes in measures of RV function (R(2) = 0.21–0.43). CONCLUSIONS: In moderate-to-severe ARDS, “short-term” 4-Hz HFO strategies resulted in better RV function versus 7-Hz HFO, partly attributable to improved PaCO(2) control, and similar or improved RV function versus CV. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered 40 days prior to the enrollment of the first patient at ClinicalTrials.gov, ID no. NCT02027129, Principal Investigator Spyros D. Mentzelopoulos, date of registration January 3, 2014. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s40560-018-0327-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6122746
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61227462018-09-10 “Low-” versus “high”-frequency oscillation and right ventricular function in ARDS. A randomized crossover study Mentzelopoulos, Spyros D. Anninos, Hector Malachias, Sotirios Zakynthinos, Spyros G. J Intensive Care Research BACKGROUND: Recent, large trials of high-frequency oscillation (HFO) versus conventional ventilation (CV) in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) reported negative results. This could be explained by an HFO-induced right ventricular (RV) dysfunction/failure due to high intrathoracic pressures and hypercapnia. We hypothesized that HFO strategies aimed at averting/attenuating hypercapnia, such as “low-frequency” (i.e., 4 Hz) HFO and 4-Hz HFO with tracheal-gas insufflation (HFO-TGI), may result in an improved RV function relative to “high-frequency” (i.e., 7 Hz) HFO (which may promote hypercapnia) and similar RV function relative to lung protective CV. METHODS: We studied 17 patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS [PaO(2)-to-inspiratory O(2) fraction ratio (PaO(2)/FiO(2)) < 150]. RV function was assessed by transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). Patients received 60 min of CV for TEE-guided, positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) “optimization” and subsequent stabilization; 60 min of 4-Hz HFO for “study mean airway pressure (mPaw)” titration to peripheral oxygen saturation ≥ 95%, without worsening RV function as assessed by TEE; 60 min of each tested HFO strategy in random order; and another 60 min of CV using the pre-HFO, TEE-guided PEEP setting. Study measurements (i.e., gas exchange, hemodynamics, and TEE data) were obtained over the last 10 min of pre-HFO CV, of each one of the three tested HFO strategies, and of post-HFO CV. RESULTS: The mean “study HFO mPaw” was 8–10 cmH(2)O higher relative to pre-HFO CV. Seven-Hz HFO versus 4-Hz HFO and 4-Hz HFO-TGI resulted in higher mean ± SD right-to-left ventricular end-diastolic area ratio (RVEDA/LVEDA) (0.64 ± 0.15 versus 0.56 ± 0.14 and 0.52 ± 0.10, respectively, both p < 0.05). Higher diastolic/systolic eccentricity indexes (1.33 ± 0.19/1.42 ± 0.17 versus 1.21 ± 0.10/1.26 ± 0.10 and 1.17 ± 0.11/1.17 ± 0.13, respectively, all p < 0.05). Seven-Hz HFO resulted in 18–28% higher PaCO(2) relative to all other ventilatory strategies (all p < 0.05). Four-Hz HFO-TGI versus pre-HFO CV resulted in 15% lower RVEDA/LVEDA, and 7%/10% lower diastolic/systolic eccentricity indexes (all p < 0.05). Mean PaO(2)/FiO(2) improved by 77–80% during HFO strategies versus CV (all p < 0.05). Mean cardiac index varied by ≤ 10% among strategies. Percent changes in PaCO(2) among strategies were predictive of concurrent percent changes in measures of RV function (R(2) = 0.21–0.43). CONCLUSIONS: In moderate-to-severe ARDS, “short-term” 4-Hz HFO strategies resulted in better RV function versus 7-Hz HFO, partly attributable to improved PaCO(2) control, and similar or improved RV function versus CV. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered 40 days prior to the enrollment of the first patient at ClinicalTrials.gov, ID no. NCT02027129, Principal Investigator Spyros D. Mentzelopoulos, date of registration January 3, 2014. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s40560-018-0327-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-09-04 /pmc/articles/PMC6122746/ /pubmed/30202530 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40560-018-0327-3 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Mentzelopoulos, Spyros D.
Anninos, Hector
Malachias, Sotirios
Zakynthinos, Spyros G.
“Low-” versus “high”-frequency oscillation and right ventricular function in ARDS. A randomized crossover study
title “Low-” versus “high”-frequency oscillation and right ventricular function in ARDS. A randomized crossover study
title_full “Low-” versus “high”-frequency oscillation and right ventricular function in ARDS. A randomized crossover study
title_fullStr “Low-” versus “high”-frequency oscillation and right ventricular function in ARDS. A randomized crossover study
title_full_unstemmed “Low-” versus “high”-frequency oscillation and right ventricular function in ARDS. A randomized crossover study
title_short “Low-” versus “high”-frequency oscillation and right ventricular function in ARDS. A randomized crossover study
title_sort “low-” versus “high”-frequency oscillation and right ventricular function in ards. a randomized crossover study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6122746/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30202530
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40560-018-0327-3
work_keys_str_mv AT mentzelopoulosspyrosd lowversushighfrequencyoscillationandrightventricularfunctioninardsarandomizedcrossoverstudy
AT anninoshector lowversushighfrequencyoscillationandrightventricularfunctioninardsarandomizedcrossoverstudy
AT malachiassotirios lowversushighfrequencyoscillationandrightventricularfunctioninardsarandomizedcrossoverstudy
AT zakynthinosspyrosg lowversushighfrequencyoscillationandrightventricularfunctioninardsarandomizedcrossoverstudy