Cargando…

Effects of pressure- and volume-controlled ventilation on the work of breathing in cats using a cuffed endotracheal tube

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Mechanical ventilation is essential for supporting patients’ respiratory function when they are under general anesthesia. For cats with limited lung capacity, the different effects of volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) and pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) on respiratory fun...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Niyatiwatchanchai, Nutawan, Thengchaisri, Naris
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Veterinary World 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8613800/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34840479
http://dx.doi.org/10.14202/vetworld.2021.2568-2573
_version_ 1784603715444932608
author Niyatiwatchanchai, Nutawan
Thengchaisri, Naris
author_facet Niyatiwatchanchai, Nutawan
Thengchaisri, Naris
author_sort Niyatiwatchanchai, Nutawan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND AIM: Mechanical ventilation is essential for supporting patients’ respiratory function when they are under general anesthesia. For cats with limited lung capacity, the different effects of volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) and pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) on respiratory function remain elusive. The objective of the present study was to compare the efficacy of VCV and PCV in cats under general anesthesia using a cuffed endotracheal tube (ETT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twelve healthy cats were randomly allocated to either a VCV or PCV group. Five tidal volumes (6, 8, 10, 12, and 14 mL/kg) were randomly applied to assess the efficacy of VCV, and respiratory rates were adjusted to achieve a minute ventilation of 100 mL/kg/min. Peak inspiratory pressures (4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 mmHg) were randomly applied to assess the efficacy of PCV, and respiratory rates were adjusted to achieve a minute ventilation of 100 mL/kg/min. Blood pressure, gas leakages, and end-tidal CO(2) were recorded from 60 trials for airway control during the use of VCV or PCV. Data were compared using Fisher’s exact test with a significance level of p<0.05. RESULTS: Leakages did not differ between VCV (1/60 events) and PCV (0/60 events; p=0.500). Hypercapnia was identified when using VCV (6/60 events) less frequently than when using PCV (7/60 events; p=0.762), but did not reach statistical significance. Hypotension (mean arterial blood pressure <60 mmHg) occurred less frequently with VCV (0/60 events) than with PCV (9/60 events; p=0.003). Moreover, VCV provided a significantly lower work of breathing (151.10±65.40 cmH(2)O mL) compared with PCV (187.84±89.72 cmH(2)O mL; p<0.05). CONCLUSION: VCV in cats using a cuffed ETT causes less hypotension than PCV. It should be noted that VCV provides a more stable tidal volume compared with PCV, resulting in a more stable minute volume. Nonetheless, VCV should not be used in patients with an airway obstruction because higher peak airway pressure may occur and lead to lung injury.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8613800
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Veterinary World
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86138002021-11-26 Effects of pressure- and volume-controlled ventilation on the work of breathing in cats using a cuffed endotracheal tube Niyatiwatchanchai, Nutawan Thengchaisri, Naris Vet World Research Article BACKGROUND AND AIM: Mechanical ventilation is essential for supporting patients’ respiratory function when they are under general anesthesia. For cats with limited lung capacity, the different effects of volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) and pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) on respiratory function remain elusive. The objective of the present study was to compare the efficacy of VCV and PCV in cats under general anesthesia using a cuffed endotracheal tube (ETT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twelve healthy cats were randomly allocated to either a VCV or PCV group. Five tidal volumes (6, 8, 10, 12, and 14 mL/kg) were randomly applied to assess the efficacy of VCV, and respiratory rates were adjusted to achieve a minute ventilation of 100 mL/kg/min. Peak inspiratory pressures (4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 mmHg) were randomly applied to assess the efficacy of PCV, and respiratory rates were adjusted to achieve a minute ventilation of 100 mL/kg/min. Blood pressure, gas leakages, and end-tidal CO(2) were recorded from 60 trials for airway control during the use of VCV or PCV. Data were compared using Fisher’s exact test with a significance level of p<0.05. RESULTS: Leakages did not differ between VCV (1/60 events) and PCV (0/60 events; p=0.500). Hypercapnia was identified when using VCV (6/60 events) less frequently than when using PCV (7/60 events; p=0.762), but did not reach statistical significance. Hypotension (mean arterial blood pressure <60 mmHg) occurred less frequently with VCV (0/60 events) than with PCV (9/60 events; p=0.003). Moreover, VCV provided a significantly lower work of breathing (151.10±65.40 cmH(2)O mL) compared with PCV (187.84±89.72 cmH(2)O mL; p<0.05). CONCLUSION: VCV in cats using a cuffed ETT causes less hypotension than PCV. It should be noted that VCV provides a more stable tidal volume compared with PCV, resulting in a more stable minute volume. Nonetheless, VCV should not be used in patients with an airway obstruction because higher peak airway pressure may occur and lead to lung injury. Veterinary World 2021-09 2021-09-29 /pmc/articles/PMC8613800/ /pubmed/34840479 http://dx.doi.org/10.14202/vetworld.2021.2568-2573 Text en Copyright: © Niyatiwatchanchai and Thengchaisri. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://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/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Niyatiwatchanchai, Nutawan
Thengchaisri, Naris
Effects of pressure- and volume-controlled ventilation on the work of breathing in cats using a cuffed endotracheal tube
title Effects of pressure- and volume-controlled ventilation on the work of breathing in cats using a cuffed endotracheal tube
title_full Effects of pressure- and volume-controlled ventilation on the work of breathing in cats using a cuffed endotracheal tube
title_fullStr Effects of pressure- and volume-controlled ventilation on the work of breathing in cats using a cuffed endotracheal tube
title_full_unstemmed Effects of pressure- and volume-controlled ventilation on the work of breathing in cats using a cuffed endotracheal tube
title_short Effects of pressure- and volume-controlled ventilation on the work of breathing in cats using a cuffed endotracheal tube
title_sort effects of pressure- and volume-controlled ventilation on the work of breathing in cats using a cuffed endotracheal tube
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8613800/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34840479
http://dx.doi.org/10.14202/vetworld.2021.2568-2573
work_keys_str_mv AT niyatiwatchanchainutawan effectsofpressureandvolumecontrolledventilationontheworkofbreathingincatsusingacuffedendotrachealtube
AT thengchaisrinaris effectsofpressureandvolumecontrolledventilationontheworkofbreathingincatsusingacuffedendotrachealtube