Reply: Transpulmonary Pressure Meaning: Babel or Conceptual Evolution?

Targeting transpulmonary pressure to prevent ventilator-induced lung injury

Introduction: Transpulmonary pressure (PL) is the pressure distending the lung. This pressure equals the stress which develops into the parenchyma at each insufflation and it depends, for a given airway pressure, on the relationship between the lung and the chest wall elastance: a given stress is associated to a given strain, therefor PL is strictly related to ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI). Insufficient knowledge and increased workload account for its limited use in the clinical setting: indeed, the current recommendations for protective ventilation still rely only on the pressures applied to the respiratory system in total (Plateau pressure), without a direct measurement of the real lung stress. Areas covered: We reviewed the significance, the assessment, the application and the limits of transpulmonary pressure in the clinical setting. Expert opinion: Transpulmonary pressure represents a physiologically sound safety limit for mechanical ventilation that should be measured and targeted at least in the most severe ARDS patients. Targeting transpulmonary pressure means 'personalizing' the ventilatory settings.

Detailed measurements of oesophageal pressure during mechanical ventilation with an advanced high-resolution manometry catheter

Background

Oesophageal pressure (PES) is used for calculation of lung and chest wall mechanics and transpulmonary pressure during mechanical ventilation. Measurements performed with a balloon catheter are suggested as a basis for setting the ventilator; however, measurements are affected by several factors. High-resolution manometry (HRM) simultaneously measures pressures at every centimetre in the whole oesophagus and thereby provides extended information about oesophageal pressure. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the factors affecting oesophageal pressure using HRM.

Methods

Oesophageal pressure was measured using a high-resolution manometry catheter in 20 mechanically ventilated patients (15 in the ICU and 5 in the OR). Different PEEP levels and different sizes of tidal volume were applied while pressures were measured continuously. In 10 patients, oesophageal pressure was also measured using a conventional balloon catheter for comparison. A retrospective analysis of oesophageal pressure measured with HRM in supine and sitting positions in 17 awake spontaneously breathing patients is also included.

Results

HRM showed large variations in end-expiratory PES (PESEE) and tidal changes in PES (ΔPES) along the oesophagus. Mean intra-individual difference between the minimum and maximum end-expiratory oesophageal pressure (PESEE at baseline PEEP) and tidal variations in oesophageal pressure (ΔPES at tidal volume 6 ml/kg) recorded by HRM in the different sections of the oesophagus was 23.7 (7.9) cmH₂O and 7.6 (3.9) cmH₂O respectively. Oesophageal pressures were affected by tidal volume, level of PEEP, part of the oesophagus included and patient positioning. HRM identified simultaneous increases and decreases in PES within a majority of individual patients. Compared to sitting position, supine position increased PESEE (mean difference 12.3 cmH₂O), pressure variation within individual patients and cardiac artefacts. The pressure measured with a balloon catheter did not correspond to the average pressure measured with HRM within the same part of the oesophagus.

Conclusions

The intra-individual variability in PESEE and ΔPES is substantial, and as a result, the balloon on the conventional catheter is affected by many different pressures along its length. Oesophageal pressures are not only affected by lung and chest wall mechanics but are a complex product of many factors, which is not obvious during conventional measurements. For correct calculations of transpulmonary pressure, factors influencing oesophageal pressures need to be known. HRM, which is available at many hospitals, can be used to increase the knowledge concerning these factors.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02901158

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13054-019-2484-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Should we titrate peep based on end-expiratory transpulmonary pressure?-yes

Ventilator management of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has been characterized by implementation of basic physiology principles by minimizing harmful distending pressures and preventing lung derecruitment. Such strategies have led to significant improvements in outcomes. Positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) is an important part of a lung protective strategy but there is no standardized method to set PEEP level. With widely varying types of lung injury, body habitus and pulmonary mechanics, the use of esophageal manometry has become important for personalization and optimization of mechanical ventilation in patients with ARDS. Esophageal manometry estimates pleural pressures, and can be used to differentiate the chest wall and lung (transpulmonary) contributions to the total respiratory system mechanics. Elevated pleural pressures may result in negative transpulmonary pressures at end expiration, leading to lung collapse. Measuring the esophageal pressures and adjusting PEEP to make transpulmonary pressures positive can decrease atelectasis, derecruitment of lung, and cyclical opening and closing of airways and alveoli, thus optimizing lung mechanics and oxygenation. Although there is some spatial and positional artifact, esophageal pressures in numerous animal and human studies in healthy, obese and critically ill patients appear to be a good estimate for the "effective" pleural pressure. Multiple studies have illustrated the benefit of using esophageal pressures to titrate PEEP in patients with obesity and with ARDS. Esophageal pressure monitoring provides a window into the unique physiology of a patient and helps improve clinical decision making at the bedside.