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...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
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 |