Effect of lung recruitment manoeuvre mode implemented by ICU specialist nurses on remission of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome / 现代临床护理

Objective To analyse the effects of the lung recruitment manoeuvre(RM)mode implemented by ICU specialist nurses on remission of the patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome(ARDS),with the aim to explore the safety,feasibility and effectiveness of clinical implementation,and to further provide a new mode for patient management in nursing practice.Methods A total of 40 ARDS patients admitted into the ICU from January 2018 to August 2021 were randomly selected and divided into control group and trial group in equal number with a random number table.Patients in the control group was treated with a conventional RM mode implemented by doctors,and the RM mode implemented by the ICU specialist nurses was applied to the patients in trial group.The indexes of arterial blood gas analysis,mechanical ventilation time,length of ICU stay,number of RM,number of adjustments to a RM plan,and complication rate were compared between the two groups after the second RM implementation.Results There was no statistically significant difference in arterial partial pressure of oxygen,arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide and oxygenation index between the groups at 1h and 24h after the second RM implementation(P>0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in the number of RM,mechanical ventilation and length of ICU stay between the groups(P>0.05).The number of modifications of the RM plan in the trial group was significantly more than that in the control group(P<0.05).There was no complication of RM in both groups.Conclusions The RM mode implemented by ICU specialist nurses could achieve good clinical effects in the treatment of patients with ARDS. The approach is safe and practicable.

Síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo pulmonar e extrapulmonar: existem diferenças? / Pulmonary and extrapulmonary acute respiratory distress syndrome: are they different?

JUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: A patogênese da síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo (SDRA) tem sido explicada pela presença de uma agressão direta (SDRA pulmonar) e/ou indireta (SDRA extrapulmonar) ao parênquima pulmonar. Evidências indicam que a fisiopatologia da doença pode diferir com o tipo de lesão. O objetivo deste estudo foi apresentar breve revisão das diferenças entre a SDRA pulmonar e a SDRA extrapulmonar e discutir as interações entre os aspectos morfofuncionais e a resposta aos diferentes tratamentos. CONTEÚDO: Esta revisão bibliográfica baseou-se em uma pesquisa sistemática de artigos experimentais e clínicos sobre SDRA incluídos nas bases de dados MedLine e SciElo nos últimos 20 anos. Muitos pesquisadores concordam, com base em estudos experimentais, que a SDRA pulmonar e a SDRA extrapulmonar não são idênticas no que diz respeito aos aspectos morfofuncionais, a resposta à pressão positiva ao final da expiração (PEEP), manobra de recrutamento alveolar, posição prona e outras terapias farmacológicas. Entretanto, os estudos clínicos têm descrito resultados contraditórios, os quais podem ser atribuídos à dificuldade de se classificar a SDRA em uma ou outra etiologia, e de se precisar o início, a fase e a gravidade da SDRA nos pacientes. CONCLUSÕES: Pacientes com SDRA de etiologias distintas perduram sendo considerados como pertencendo a uma mesma síndrome e, assim, são tratados da mesma forma. Logo, é fundamental entender as diferenças fisiopatológicas entre a SDRA pulmonar e extrapulmonar para que a terapia seja mais bem direcionada.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The pathogenesis of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has been described by the presence of direct (pulmonary) and/or indirect (extrapulmonary) insult to the lung parenchyma. Evidence indicates that the pathophysiology of ARDS may differ according to the type of primary insult. This article presents a brief overview of differences between pulmonary and extrapulmonary ARDS, and discusses the interactions between morpho-functional aspects and response to differents therapies, both in experimental and clinical studies. CONTENTS: This systematic review included clinical and experimental ARDS studies found in MedLine and SciElo databases in the last 20 years. Many researchers acknowledge that experimental pulmonary and extrapulmonary ARDS are not identical with regard to morpho-functional aspects, the response to positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), recruitment manoeuvre, prone position and other adjunctive therapies. However, contradictory results have been reported in different clinical studies, which could be attributed to the difficulty of classifying ARDS in one or the other category, and to the assurance regarding the onset, phase and severity of ARDS in all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Heterogeneous ARDS patients are still considered as belonging to one syndrome, and are therefore treated in a similar manner. Thus, it is important to understand the pathophysiology of pulmonary and extrapulmonary ARDS in an attempt to better treat these patients.