Changes in Therapeutic Intensity Level Following Airway Pressure Release Ventilation in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury

American Association for the Surgery of Trauma/American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma clinical protocol for management of acute respiratory distress syndrome and severe hypoxemia

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management: Level V.

Does airway pressure release ventilation offer new hope for treating acute respiratory distress syndrome?

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.

Lung Protective Ventilation in Brain-Injured Patients: Low Tidal Volumes or Airway Pressure Release Ventilation?

The optimal mode of mechanical ventilation for lung protection is unknown in brain-injured patients as this population is excluded from large studies of lung protective mechanical ventilation. Survey results suggest that low tidal volume (LTV) ventilation is the favored mode likely due to the success of LTV in other patient populations. Airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) is an alternative mode of mechanical ventilation that may offer several benefits over LTV in this patient population. APRV is an inverse-ratio, pressure-controlled mode of mechanical ventilation that utilizes a higher mean airway pressure compared with LTV. This narrative review compares both modes of mechanical ventilation and their consequences in brain-injured patients. Fears that APRV may raise intracranial pressure by virtue of a higher mean airway pressure are not substantiated by the available evidence. Primarily by virtue of spontaneous breathing, APRV often results in improvement in systemic hemodynamics and thereby improvement in cerebral perfusion pressure. Compared with LTV, sedation requirements are lessened by APRV allowing for more accurate neuromonitoring. APRV also uses an open loop system supporting clearance of secretions throughout the respiratory cycle. Additionally, APRV avoids hypercapnic acidosis and oxygen toxicity that may be especially deleterious to the injured brain. Although high-level evidence is lacking that one mode of mechanical ventilation is superior to another in brain-injured patients, several aspects of APRV make it an appealing mode for select brain-injured patients.

Airway pressure release ventilation in children

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) has been purported to have several physiological benefits. This review synthesizes recent research evaluating APRV mode and provides perspectives on the utility of this mode in children with ARDS.

RECENT FINDINGS

Two single-center clinical trials on APRV, one adult and one pediatric, have been published this year. These two trials have not only elicited editorials and letters that highlight some of their strengths and weaknesses but also rekindled debate on several aspects of APRV. Despite their contradicting results, both trials provide significant insights into APRV strategies that work and those that may not. This review places the newer evidence in the context of existing literature and provides a comprehensive analysis of APRV use in children.

SUMMARY

There have been significant recent advancements in our understanding of the clinical utility of APRV in children with ARDS. The recent trial highlights the urgent need to evolve a consensus on definition of APRV and identify strategies that work. Pending further research, clinicians should avoid the use of a zero-PLOW Personalized-APRV strategy as a primary ventilation modality in children with moderate-severe ARDS.

Contemporary ventilatory strategies for surgical patients

Respiratory failure affects a significant percentage of critically ill children, necessitating both invasive and non-invasive respiratory support. As the outcomes of these patients have improved, children with higher acuity and more complex respiratory pathophysiology require mechanical ventilation. Despite growing understanding of lung-protective strategies and ventilation induced lung injury, certain patients still require harmful ventilatory settings with conventional mechanical ventilation (CMV). High frequency ventilation, neurally adjusted ventilatory assist, and airway pressure release ventilation offer feasible alternatives to CMV. In addition to minimizing the risk of ventilatory induced lung injury when used appropriately, they provide a unique environment to facilitate operations on certain neonates and older children. Finally, non-invasive ventilation is now commonly employed in children with surgical conditions.

Airway pressure release ventilation does not increase intracranial pressure in patients with traumatic brain injury with poor lung compliance

The use of Airway Pressure Release Ventilation (APRV) in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) remains controversial. Some believe that elevated mean airway pressures transmitted to the thorax may cause clinically significant increases in Central Venous Pressure (CVP) and intracranial pressure (ICP) from venous congestion. We perform a retrospective review from 2009 to 2015 of traumatically injured patients who were transitioned from traditional ventilator modes to APRV and also had an ICP monitor in place. Fifteen patients undergoing 19 transitions to APRV were identified. Prior to transitioning to APRV the average static and dynamic compliance was 22.9 +/- 5.6 and 16.5 +/- 4.12 mL/cm H2O. There was no statistical difference in ICP, MAP, and CPP prior to and after transition to APRV. There was a statistically significant increase in CVP, PaO2, and P:F ratio. Individually, only 4 patients had ICP values >20 in the first hour after transitioning to APRV and the rate of ICP elevations was similar between the two modes of ventilation. These data show that APRV is a viable mode of ventilation in patients with TBI who have low lung compliance. The increased CVP of this mode of ventilation did not affect ICP or hemodynamic parameters.