Cargando…

Time constant to determine PEEP levels in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 ARDS: a feasibility study

BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that the measured expiratory time constant (TauE) could be a bedside parameter for the evaluation of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) settings in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients during pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV). METHODS: A prospective study wa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Depta, Filip, Euliano, Neil R., Zdravkovic, Marko, Török, Pavol, Gentile, Michael A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9745286/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36513978
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-022-01935-8
_version_ 1784849116908486656
author Depta, Filip
Euliano, Neil R.
Zdravkovic, Marko
Török, Pavol
Gentile, Michael A.
author_facet Depta, Filip
Euliano, Neil R.
Zdravkovic, Marko
Török, Pavol
Gentile, Michael A.
author_sort Depta, Filip
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that the measured expiratory time constant (TauE) could be a bedside parameter for the evaluation of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) settings in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients during pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV). METHODS: A prospective study was conducted including consecutively admitted adults (n = 16) with COVID-19-related ARDS requiring mechanical ventilation. A PEEP titration using PCV with a fixed driving pressure of 14 cmH(2)O was performed and TauE recorded at each PEEP level (0 to 18 cmH(2)O) in prone (n = 29) or supine (n = 24) positions. The PEEP setting with the highest TauE (TauE(MAX)) was considered to represent the best tradeoff between recruitment and overdistention. RESULTS: Two groups of patterns were observed in the TauE plots: recruitable (R) (75%) and nonrecruitable (NR) (25%). In the R group, the optimal PEEP and PEEP ranges were 8 ± 3 cmH(2)O and 6–10 cmH(2)O for the prone position and 9 ± 3 cmH(2)O and 7–12 cmH(2)O for the supine position. In the NR group, the optimal PEEP and PEEP ranges were 4 ± 4 cmH(2)O and 1–8 cmH(2)O for the prone position and 5 ± 3 cmH(2)O and 1–7 cmH(2)O for the supine position, respectively. The R group showed significantly higher optimal PEEP (p < 0.004) and PEEP ranges (p < 0.001) than the NR group. Forty-five percent of measurements resulted in the most optimal PEEP being significantly different between the positions (p < 0.01). Moderate positive correlation has been found between TauE vs C(RS) at all PEEP levels (r(2) = 0.43, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: TauE may be a novel method to assess PEEP levels. There was wide variation in patient responses to PEEP, which indicates the need for personalized evaluation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9745286
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97452862022-12-13 Time constant to determine PEEP levels in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 ARDS: a feasibility study Depta, Filip Euliano, Neil R. Zdravkovic, Marko Török, Pavol Gentile, Michael A. BMC Anesthesiol Research BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that the measured expiratory time constant (TauE) could be a bedside parameter for the evaluation of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) settings in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients during pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV). METHODS: A prospective study was conducted including consecutively admitted adults (n = 16) with COVID-19-related ARDS requiring mechanical ventilation. A PEEP titration using PCV with a fixed driving pressure of 14 cmH(2)O was performed and TauE recorded at each PEEP level (0 to 18 cmH(2)O) in prone (n = 29) or supine (n = 24) positions. The PEEP setting with the highest TauE (TauE(MAX)) was considered to represent the best tradeoff between recruitment and overdistention. RESULTS: Two groups of patterns were observed in the TauE plots: recruitable (R) (75%) and nonrecruitable (NR) (25%). In the R group, the optimal PEEP and PEEP ranges were 8 ± 3 cmH(2)O and 6–10 cmH(2)O for the prone position and 9 ± 3 cmH(2)O and 7–12 cmH(2)O for the supine position. In the NR group, the optimal PEEP and PEEP ranges were 4 ± 4 cmH(2)O and 1–8 cmH(2)O for the prone position and 5 ± 3 cmH(2)O and 1–7 cmH(2)O for the supine position, respectively. The R group showed significantly higher optimal PEEP (p < 0.004) and PEEP ranges (p < 0.001) than the NR group. Forty-five percent of measurements resulted in the most optimal PEEP being significantly different between the positions (p < 0.01). Moderate positive correlation has been found between TauE vs C(RS) at all PEEP levels (r(2) = 0.43, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: TauE may be a novel method to assess PEEP levels. There was wide variation in patient responses to PEEP, which indicates the need for personalized evaluation. BioMed Central 2022-12-13 /pmc/articles/PMC9745286/ /pubmed/36513978 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-022-01935-8 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
Depta, Filip
Euliano, Neil R.
Zdravkovic, Marko
Török, Pavol
Gentile, Michael A.
Time constant to determine PEEP levels in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 ARDS: a feasibility study
title Time constant to determine PEEP levels in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 ARDS: a feasibility study
title_full Time constant to determine PEEP levels in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 ARDS: a feasibility study
title_fullStr Time constant to determine PEEP levels in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 ARDS: a feasibility study
title_full_unstemmed Time constant to determine PEEP levels in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 ARDS: a feasibility study
title_short Time constant to determine PEEP levels in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 ARDS: a feasibility study
title_sort time constant to determine peep levels in mechanically ventilated covid-19 ards: a feasibility study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9745286/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36513978
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-022-01935-8
work_keys_str_mv AT deptafilip timeconstanttodeterminepeeplevelsinmechanicallyventilatedcovid19ardsafeasibilitystudy
AT eulianoneilr timeconstanttodeterminepeeplevelsinmechanicallyventilatedcovid19ardsafeasibilitystudy
AT zdravkovicmarko timeconstanttodeterminepeeplevelsinmechanicallyventilatedcovid19ardsafeasibilitystudy
AT torokpavol timeconstanttodeterminepeeplevelsinmechanicallyventilatedcovid19ardsafeasibilitystudy
AT gentilemichaela timeconstanttodeterminepeeplevelsinmechanicallyventilatedcovid19ardsafeasibilitystudy