Cargando…

PEEP-FiO(2) table versus EIT to titrate PEEP in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19-related ARDS

RATIONALE: It is unknown how to titrate positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in patients with COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Guidelines recommend the one-size-fits-all PEEP-FiO(2) table. In this retrospective cohort study, an electrical impedance tomography (EIT)-gui...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Somhorst, Peter, van der Zee, Philip, Endeman, Henrik, Gommers, Diederik
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9465137/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36096837
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-022-04135-5
_version_ 1784787726981136384
author Somhorst, Peter
van der Zee, Philip
Endeman, Henrik
Gommers, Diederik
author_facet Somhorst, Peter
van der Zee, Philip
Endeman, Henrik
Gommers, Diederik
author_sort Somhorst, Peter
collection PubMed
description RATIONALE: It is unknown how to titrate positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in patients with COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Guidelines recommend the one-size-fits-all PEEP-FiO(2) table. In this retrospective cohort study, an electrical impedance tomography (EIT)-guided PEEP trial was used to titrate PEEP. OBJECTIVES: To compare baseline PEEP according to the high PEEP-FiO(2) table and personalized PEEP following an EIT-guided PEEP trial. METHODS: We performed an EIT-guided decremental PEEP trial in patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19-related ARDS upon intensive care unit admission. PEEP was set at the lowest PEEP above the intersection of curves representing relative alveolar overdistention and collapse. Baseline PEEP was compared with PEEP set according to EIT. We identified patients in whom the EIT-guided PEEP trial resulted in a decrease or increase in PEEP of ≥ 2 cmH(2)O. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We performed a PEEP trial in 75 patients. In 23 (31%) patients, PEEP was decreased ≥ 2 cmH(2)O, and in 24 (32%) patients, PEEP was increased ≥ 2 cmH(2)O. Patients in whom PEEP was decreased had improved respiratory mechanics and more overdistention in the non-dependent lung region at higher PEEP levels. These patients also had a lower BMI, longer time between onset of symptoms and intubation, and higher incidence of pulmonary embolism. Oxygenation improved in patients in whom PEEP was increased. CONCLUSIONS: An EIT-guided PEEP trial resulted in a relevant change in PEEP in 63% of patients. These results support the hypothesis that PEEP should be personalized in patients with ARDS. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-022-04135-5.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9465137
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94651372022-09-12 PEEP-FiO(2) table versus EIT to titrate PEEP in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19-related ARDS Somhorst, Peter van der Zee, Philip Endeman, Henrik Gommers, Diederik Crit Care Research RATIONALE: It is unknown how to titrate positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in patients with COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Guidelines recommend the one-size-fits-all PEEP-FiO(2) table. In this retrospective cohort study, an electrical impedance tomography (EIT)-guided PEEP trial was used to titrate PEEP. OBJECTIVES: To compare baseline PEEP according to the high PEEP-FiO(2) table and personalized PEEP following an EIT-guided PEEP trial. METHODS: We performed an EIT-guided decremental PEEP trial in patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19-related ARDS upon intensive care unit admission. PEEP was set at the lowest PEEP above the intersection of curves representing relative alveolar overdistention and collapse. Baseline PEEP was compared with PEEP set according to EIT. We identified patients in whom the EIT-guided PEEP trial resulted in a decrease or increase in PEEP of ≥ 2 cmH(2)O. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We performed a PEEP trial in 75 patients. In 23 (31%) patients, PEEP was decreased ≥ 2 cmH(2)O, and in 24 (32%) patients, PEEP was increased ≥ 2 cmH(2)O. Patients in whom PEEP was decreased had improved respiratory mechanics and more overdistention in the non-dependent lung region at higher PEEP levels. These patients also had a lower BMI, longer time between onset of symptoms and intubation, and higher incidence of pulmonary embolism. Oxygenation improved in patients in whom PEEP was increased. CONCLUSIONS: An EIT-guided PEEP trial resulted in a relevant change in PEEP in 63% of patients. These results support the hypothesis that PEEP should be personalized in patients with ARDS. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-022-04135-5. BioMed Central 2022-09-12 /pmc/articles/PMC9465137/ /pubmed/36096837 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-022-04135-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . 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 in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Somhorst, Peter
van der Zee, Philip
Endeman, Henrik
Gommers, Diederik
PEEP-FiO(2) table versus EIT to titrate PEEP in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19-related ARDS
title PEEP-FiO(2) table versus EIT to titrate PEEP in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19-related ARDS
title_full PEEP-FiO(2) table versus EIT to titrate PEEP in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19-related ARDS
title_fullStr PEEP-FiO(2) table versus EIT to titrate PEEP in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19-related ARDS
title_full_unstemmed PEEP-FiO(2) table versus EIT to titrate PEEP in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19-related ARDS
title_short PEEP-FiO(2) table versus EIT to titrate PEEP in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19-related ARDS
title_sort peep-fio(2) table versus eit to titrate peep in mechanically ventilated patients with covid-19-related ards
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9465137/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36096837
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-022-04135-5
work_keys_str_mv AT somhorstpeter peepfio2tableversuseittotitratepeepinmechanicallyventilatedpatientswithcovid19relatedards
AT vanderzeephilip peepfio2tableversuseittotitratepeepinmechanicallyventilatedpatientswithcovid19relatedards
AT endemanhenrik peepfio2tableversuseittotitratepeepinmechanicallyventilatedpatientswithcovid19relatedards
AT gommersdiederik peepfio2tableversuseittotitratepeepinmechanicallyventilatedpatientswithcovid19relatedards