1
|
Comparison of Airway Pressure Release Ventilation to High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation in Neonates with Refractory Respiratory Failure. Int J Pediatr 2022; 2022:7864280. [PMID: 35546962 PMCID: PMC9085362 DOI: 10.1155/2022/7864280] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/28/2021] [Revised: 03/10/2022] [Accepted: 03/25/2022] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) is a relatively new mode of ventilation in neonates. We hypothesize that APRV is an effective rescue mode in infants failing conventional ventilation and it is comparable in survival rates to rescue with high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV). Methods This is a 6-year retrospective cohort study of infants that failed synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation (SIMV) and were rescued with either APRV or HFOV. For comparison, we divided infants into two groups (28-37 and >37 weeks) based on their corrected gestational age (CGA) at failure of SIMV. Results Ninety infants were included in the study. Infants rescued with APRV (n = 46) had similar survival rates to those rescued with HFOV (n = 44)—28-37 weeks CGA (APRV 78% vs. HFOV 84%, p = 0.68) and >37 weeks CGA (APRV 76% vs. HFOV 72%, p = 0.74). Use of APRV was not associated with an increase in pneumothorax (APRV 0% and HFOV 10%, p = 0.31, in 28-37 weeks CGA, and APRV 0% and HFOV 4%, p = 0.22, in >37 weeks CGA). Conclusion APRV can be effectively used to rescue infants with refractory respiratory failure on SIMV. When compared to HFOV, rescue with APRV is not associated with an increase in mortality or pneumothorax.
Collapse
|
2
|
Cheng J, Ma A, Dong M, Zhou Y, Wang B, Xue Y, Wang P, Yang J, Kang Y. Does airway pressure release ventilation offer new hope for treating acute respiratory distress syndrome? JOURNAL OF INTENSIVE MEDICINE 2022; 2:241-248. [PMID: 36785647 PMCID: PMC8958099 DOI: 10.1016/j.jointm.2022.02.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/28/2021] [Revised: 01/30/2022] [Accepted: 02/16/2022] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
Mechanical ventilation (MV) is an essential life support method for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), which is one of the most common critical illnesses with high mortality in the intensive care unit (ICU). A lung-protective ventilation strategy based on low tidal volume (LTV) has been recommended since a few years; however, as this did not result in a significant decrease of ARDS-related mortality, a more optimal ventilation mode was required. Airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) is an old method defined as a continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) with a brief intermittent release phase based on the open lung concept; it also perfectly fits the ARDS treatment principle. Despite this, APRV has not been widely used in the past, rather only as a rescue measure for ARDS patients who are difficult to oxygenate. Over recent years, with an increased understanding of the pathophysiology of ARDS, APRV has been reproposed to improve patient prognosis. Nevertheless, this mode is still not routinely used in ARDS patients given its vague definition and complexity. Consequently, in this paper, we summarize the studies that used APRV in ARDS, including adults, children, and animals, to illustrate the settings of parameters, effectiveness in the population, safety (especially in children), incidence, and mechanism of ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI) and effects on extrapulmonary organs. Finally, we found that APRV is likely associated with improvement in ARDS outcomes, and does not increase injury to the lungs and other organs, thereby indicating that personalized APRV settings may be the new hope for ARDS treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Jing Yang
- Corresponding authors: Yan Kang and Jing Yang, Department of Critical Care Medicine, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China.
| | - Yan Kang
- Corresponding authors: Yan Kang and Jing Yang, Department of Critical Care Medicine, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
|
4
|
Kollisch-Singule M, Andrews P, Satalin J, Gatto LA, Nieman GF, Habashi NM. The time-controlled adaptive ventilation protocol: mechanistic approach to reducing ventilator-induced lung injury. Eur Respir Rev 2019; 28:28/152/180126. [PMID: 30996041 DOI: 10.1183/16000617.0126-2018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/27/2018] [Accepted: 02/16/2019] [Indexed: 11/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) is a ventilator mode that has previously been considered a rescue mode, but has gained acceptance as a primary mode of ventilation. In clinical series and experimental animal models of extrapulmonary acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), the early application of APRV was able to prevent the development of ARDS. Recent experimental evidence has suggested mechanisms by which APRV, using the time-controlled adaptive ventilation (TCAV) protocol, may reduce lung injury, including: 1) an improvement in alveolar recruitment and homogeneity; 2) reduction in alveolar and alveolar duct micro-strain and stress-risers; 3) reduction in alveolar tidal volumes; and 4) recruitment of the chest wall by combating increased intra-abdominal pressure. This review examines these studies and discusses our current understanding of the pleiotropic mechanisms by which TCAV protects the lung. APRV set according to the TCAV protocol has been misunderstood and this review serves to highlight the various protective physiological and mechanical effects it has on the lung, so that its clinical application may be broadened.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Penny Andrews
- Dept of Trauma Critical Care Medicine, R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Joshua Satalin
- Dept of Surgery, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY, USA
| | - Louis A Gatto
- Dept of Surgery, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY, USA.,Dept of Biological Sciences, SUNY Cortland, Cortland, NY, USA
| | - Gary F Nieman
- Dept of Surgery, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY, USA
| | - Nader M Habashi
- Dept of Trauma Critical Care Medicine, R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Jain SV, Kollisch-Singule M, Sadowitz B, Dombert L, Satalin J, Andrews P, Gatto LA, Nieman GF, Habashi NM. The 30-year evolution of airway pressure release ventilation (APRV). Intensive Care Med Exp 2016; 4:11. [PMID: 27207149 PMCID: PMC4875584 DOI: 10.1186/s40635-016-0085-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 67] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/21/2016] [Accepted: 05/03/2016] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) was first described in 1987 and defined as continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) with a brief release while allowing the patient to spontaneously breathe throughout the respiratory cycle. The current understanding of the optimal strategy to minimize ventilator-induced lung injury is to "open the lung and keep it open". APRV should be ideal for this strategy with the prolonged CPAP duration recruiting the lung and the minimal release duration preventing lung collapse. However, APRV is inconsistently defined with significant variation in the settings used in experimental studies and in clinical practice. The goal of this review was to analyze the published literature and determine APRV efficacy as a lung-protective strategy. We reviewed all original articles in which the authors stated that APRV was used. The primary analysis was to correlate APRV settings with physiologic and clinical outcomes. Results showed that there was tremendous variation in settings that were all defined as APRV, particularly CPAP and release phase duration and the parameters used to guide these settings. Thus, it was impossible to assess efficacy of a single strategy since almost none of the APRV settings were identical. Therefore, we divided all APRV studies divided into two basic categories: (1) fixed-setting APRV (F-APRV) in which the release phase is set and left constant; and (2) personalized-APRV (P-APRV) in which the release phase is set based on changes in lung mechanics using the slope of the expiratory flow curve. Results showed that in no study was there a statistically significant worse outcome with APRV, regardless of the settings (F-ARPV or P-APRV). Multiple studies demonstrated that P-APRV stabilizes alveoli and reduces the incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in clinically relevant animal models and in trauma patients. In conclusion, over the 30 years since the mode's inception there have been no strict criteria in defining a mechanical breath as being APRV. P-APRV has shown great promise as a highly lung-protective ventilation strategy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sumeet V Jain
- Department of Surgery, SUNY Upstate Medical University, 750 E Adams St, Syracuse, NY, 13210, USA
| | | | - Benjamin Sadowitz
- Department of Surgery, SUNY Upstate Medical University, 750 E Adams St, Syracuse, NY, 13210, USA
| | - Luke Dombert
- Department of Surgery, SUNY Upstate Medical University, 750 E Adams St, Syracuse, NY, 13210, USA
| | - Josh Satalin
- Department of Surgery, SUNY Upstate Medical University, 750 E Adams St, Syracuse, NY, 13210, USA.
| | - Penny Andrews
- Multi-trauma Critical Care, R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center, University of Maryland Medical Center, 22 South Greene Street, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Louis A Gatto
- Department of Surgery, SUNY Upstate Medical University, 750 E Adams St, Syracuse, NY, 13210, USA.,Department of Biological Sciences, 10 SUNY Cortland, Cortland, NY, 13045, USA
| | - Gary F Nieman
- Department of Surgery, SUNY Upstate Medical University, 750 E Adams St, Syracuse, NY, 13210, USA
| | - Nader M Habashi
- Multi-trauma Critical Care, R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center, University of Maryland Medical Center, 22 South Greene Street, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Lung protective ventilation (ARDSNet) versus airway pressure release ventilation: ventilatory management in a combined model of acute lung and brain injury. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 2015; 78:240-9; discussion 249-51. [PMID: 25757107 DOI: 10.1097/ta.0000000000000518] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Concomitant lung/brain traumatic injury results in significant morbidity and mortality. Lung protective ventilation (Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network [ARDSNet]) has become the standard for managing adult respiratory distress syndrome; however, the resulting permissive hypercapnea may compound traumatic brain injury. Airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) offers an alternative strategy for the management of this patient population. APRV was hypothesized to retard the progression of acute lung/brain injury to a degree greater than ARDSNet in a swine model. METHODS Yorkshire swine were randomized to ARDSNet, APRV, or sham. Ventilatory settings and pulmonary parameters, vitals, blood gases, quantitative histopathology, and cerebral microdialysis were compared between groups using χ2, Fisher's exact, Student's t test, Wilcoxon rank-sum, and mixed-effects repeated-measures modeling. RESULTS Twenty-two swine (17 male, 5 female), weighing a mean (SD) of 25 (6.0) kg, were randomized to APRV (n = 9), ARDSNet (n = 12), or sham (n = 1). PaO2/FIO2 ratio dropped significantly, while intracranial pressure increased significantly for all three groups immediately following lung and brain injury. Over time, peak inspiratory pressure, mean airway pressure, and PaO2/FIO2 ratio significantly increased, while total respiratory rate significantly decreased within the APRV group compared with the ARDSNet group. Histopathology did not show significant differences between groups in overall brain or lung tissue injury; however, cerebral microdialysis trends suggested increased ischemia within the APRV group compared with ARDSNet over time. CONCLUSION Previous studies have not evaluated the effects of APRV in this population. While our macroscopic parameters and histopathology did not observe a significant difference between groups, microdialysis data suggest a trend toward increased cerebral ischemia associated with APRV over time. Additional and future studies should focus on extending the time interval for observation to further delineate differences between groups.
Collapse
|
7
|
|
8
|
Fan E, Villar J, Slutsky AS. Novel approaches to minimize ventilator-induced lung injury. BMC Med 2013; 11:85. [PMID: 23536968 PMCID: PMC3621434 DOI: 10.1186/1741-7015-11-85] [Citation(s) in RCA: 78] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2012] [Accepted: 02/07/2013] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Despite over 40 years of research, there is no specific lung-directed therapy for the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Although much has evolved in our understanding of its pathogenesis and factors affecting patient outcome, supportive care with mechanical ventilation remains the cornerstone of treatment. Perhaps the most important advance in ARDS research has been the recognition that mechanical ventilation, although necessary to preserve life, can itself aggravate or cause lung damage through a variety of mechanisms collectively referred to as ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI). This improved understanding of ARDS and VILI has been important in designing lung-protective ventilatory strategies aimed at attenuating VILI and improving outcomes. Considerable effort has been made to enhance our mechanistic understanding of VILI and to develop new ventilatory strategies and therapeutic interventions to prevent and ameliorate VILI with the goal of improving outcomes in patients with ARDS. In this review, we will review the pathophysiology of VILI, discuss a number of novel physiological approaches for minimizing VILI, therapies to counteract biotrauma, and highlight a number of experimental studies to support these concepts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eddy Fan
- Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Current World Literature. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 2012; 25:260-9. [DOI: 10.1097/aco.0b013e3283521230] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
|