Progress of mechanical power in the intensive care unit

Comprehensive study of mechanical power in controlled mechanical ventilation: Prevalence of elevated mechanical power and component analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the prevalence of elevated mechanical power (MP) values (>17J/min) used in routine clinical practice.

DESIGN

Observational, descriptive, cross-sectional, analytical, multicenter, international study conducted on November 21, 2019, from 8:00 AM to 3:00 PM. NCT03936231.

SETTING

One hundred thirty-three Critical Care Units.

PATIENTS

Patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation for any cause.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MAIN VARIABLES OF INTEREST

Mechanical power.

RESULTS

A population of 372 patients was analyzed. PM was significantly higher in patients under pressure-controlled ventilation (PC) compared to volume-controlled ventilation (VC) (19.20±8.44J/min vs. 16.01±6.88J/min; p<0.001), but the percentage of patients with PM>17J/min was not different (41% vs. 35%, respectively; p=0.382). The best models according to AICcw expressing PM for patients in VC are described as follows: Surrogate Strain (Driving Pressure) + PEEP+Surrogate Strain Rate (PEEP/Flow Ratio) + Respiratory Rate. For patients in PC, it is defined as: Surrogate Strain (Expiratory Tidal Volume/PEEP) + PEEP+Surrogate Strain Rate (Surrogate Strain/Ti) + Respiratory Rate+Expiratory Tidal Volume+Ti.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial proportion of mechanically ventilated patients may be at risk of experiencing elevated levels of mechanical power. Despite observed differences in mechanical power values between VC and PC ventilation, they did not result in a significant disparity in the prevalence of high mechanical power values.

The Impact of Mechanical Energy Assessment on Mechanical Ventilation: A Comprehensive Review and Practical Application

Mechanical ventilation (MV) provides basic organ support for patients who have acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, with acute respiratory distress syndrome as the most severe form. The use of excessive ventilation forces can exacerbate the lung condition and lead to ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI); mechanical energy (ME) or power can characterize such forces applied during MV. The ME metric combines all MV parameters affecting the respiratory system (ie, lungs, chest, and airways) into a single value. Besides evaluating the overall ME, this parameter can be also related to patient-specific characteristics, such as lung compliance or patient weight, which can further improve the value of ME for characterizing the aggressiveness of lung ventilation. High ME is associated with poor outcomes and could be used as a prognostic parameter and indicator of the risk of VILI. ME is rarely determined in everyday practice because the calculations are complicated and based on multiple equations. Although low ME does not conclusively prevent the possibility of VILI (eg, due to the lung inhomogeneity and preexisting damage), individualization of MV settings considering ME appears to improve outcomes. This article aims to review the roles of bedside assessment of mechanical power, its relevance in mechanical ventilation, and its associations with treatment outcomes. In addition, we discuss methods for ME determination, aiming to propose the most suitable method for bedside application of the ME concept in everyday practice.

Influence of mechanical power and its components on mechanical ventilation in SARS-CoV-2

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the influence of mechanical power and its components on mechanical ventilation for patients infected with SARS-CoV-2; identify the values of the mechanical ventilation components and verify their correlations with each other and with the mechanical power and effects on the result of the Gattinoni-S and Giosa formulas.

METHODS

This was an observational, longitudinal, analytical and quantitative study of respirator and mechanical power parameters in patients with SARS-CoV-2.

RESULTS

The mean mechanical power was 26.9J/minute (Gattinoni-S) and 30.3 J/minute (Giosa). The driving pressure was 14.4cmH2O, the plateau pressure was 26.5cmH2O, the positive end-expiratory pressure was 12.1cmH2O, the elastance was 40.6cmH2O/L, the tidal volume was 0.36L, and the respiratory rate was 32 breaths/minute. The correlation between the Gattinoni and Giosa formulas was 0.98, with a bias of -3.4J/minute and a difference in the correlation of the resistance pressure of 0.39 (Gattinoni) and 0.24 (Giosa). Among the components, the correlations between elastance and driving pressure (0.88), positive end-expiratory pressure (-0.54) and tidal volume (-0.44) stood out.

CONCLUSION

In the analysis of mechanical ventilation for patients with SARS-CoV-2, it was found that the correlations of its components with mechanical power influenced its high momentary values and and that the correlations of its components with each other influenced their behavior throughout the study period. Because they have specific effects on the Gatinnoni-S and Giosa formulas, the mechanical ventilation components influenced their calculations and caused divergence in the mechanical power values.