Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist vs. pressure support to deliver protective mechanical ventilation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized crossover trial.

BACKGROUND: Protective mechanical ventilation is recommended for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), but it usually requires controlled ventilation and sedation. Using neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA) or pressure support ventilation (PSV) could have additional benefits, including the use of lower sedative doses, improved patient-ventilator interaction and shortened duration of mechanical ventilation. We designed a pilot study to assess the feasibility of keeping tidal volume (VT) at protective levels with NAVA and PSV in patients with ARDS. METHODS: We conducted a prospective randomized crossover trial in five ICUs from a university hospital in Brazil and included patients with ARDS transitioning from controlled ventilation to partial ventilatory support. NAVA and PSV were applied in random order, for 15 min each, followed by 3 h in NAVA. Flow, peak airway pressure (Paw) and electrical activity of the diaphragm (EAdi) were captured from the ventilator, and a software (Matlab, Mathworks, USA), automatically detected inspiratory efforts and calculated respiratory rate (RR) and VT. Asynchrony events detection was based on waveform analysis. RESULTS: We randomized 20 patients, but the protocol was interrupted for five (25%) patients for whom we were unable to maintain VT below 6.5 mL/kg in PSV due to strong inspiratory efforts and for one patient for whom we could not detect EAdi signal. For the 14 patients who completed the protocol, VT was 5.8 ± 1.1 mL/kg for NAVA and 5.6 ± 1.0 mL/kg for PSV (p = 0.455) and there were no differences in RR (24 ± 7 for NAVA and 23 ± 7 for PSV, p = 0.661). Paw was greater in NAVA (21 ± 3 cmH2O) than in PSV (19 ± 3 cmH2O, p = 0.001). Most patients were under continuous sedation during the study. NAVA reduced triggering delay compared to PSV (p = 0.020) and the median asynchrony Index was 0.7% (0-2.7) in PSV and 0% (0-2.2) in NAVA (p = 0.6835). CONCLUSIONS: It was feasible to keep VT in protective levels with NAVA and PSV for 75% of the patients. NAVA resulted in similar VT, RR and Paw compared to PSV. Our findings suggest that partial ventilatory assistance with NAVA and PSV is feasible as a protective ventilation strategy in selected ARDS patients under continuous sedation. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01519258). Registered 26 January 2012, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01519258.

Performance of Noninvasive Ventilation Masks in a Lung Model of COPD Exacerbation.

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) reduces intubation and mortality in patients with COPD exacerbation who present with respiratory failure, and the type of mask may affect its success. Our objective was to compare the performance of 3 different NIV masks in a lung model. METHODS: We set the lung simulator mechanics and respiratory rate, and tested a small oronasal mask, a total face mask, and a large oronasal mask. We added CO2 at a constant rate into the system and monitored the end-tidal carbon dioxide. We used a mechanical ventilator to deliver NIV in 8 different combinations of inspiratory effort, pressure support, and expiratory positive airway pressure. We measured end-tidal carbon dioxide mask leakage, tidal volume, trigger time, time to achieve 90% of the inspiratory target during inspiration, and excess inspiratory time. RESULTS: We presented the mean ± SD of the 8 simulated conditions for each mask. The mean ± SD leakage was higher for the total face mask (51 ± 6 L/min) than for the small oronasal mask (37 ± 5 L/min) and for the large oronasal mask (21 ± 3 L/min), P < .001; but end-tidal carbon dioxide and tidal volume were similar. The mean ± SD 90% of the inspiratory target during inspiration was faster for the small oronasal mask (585 ± 49 ms) compared with the large oronasal (647 ± 107 ms) and total face mask (851 ± 105 ms), P < .001, all other variables were similar. CONCLUSIONS: In this model, we found that the type of mask had no impact on CO2 washout or on most synchrony variables.

Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist (NAVA) or Pressure Support Ventilation (PSV) during spontaneous breathing trials in critically ill patients: a crossover trial.

BACKGROUND: Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist (NAVA) is a proportional ventilatory mode that uses the electrical activity of the diaphragm (EAdi) to offer ventilatory assistance in proportion to patient effort. NAVA has been increasingly used for critically ill patients, but it has not been evaluated during spontaneous breathing trials (SBT). We designed a pilot trial to assess the feasibility of using NAVA during SBTs, and to compare the breathing pattern and patient-ventilator asynchrony of NAVA with Pressure Support (PSV) during SBTs. METHODS: We conducted a crossover trial in the ICU of a university hospital in Brazil and included mechanically ventilated patients considered ready to undergo an SBT on the day of the study. Patients underwent two SBTs in randomized order: 30 min in PSV of 5 cmH2O or NAVA titrated to generate equivalent peak airway pressure (Paw), with a positive end-expiratory pressure of 5 cmH2O. The ICU team, blinded to ventilatory mode, evaluated whether patients passed each SBT. We captured flow, Paw and electrical activity of the diaphragm (EAdi) from the ventilator and used it to calculate respiratory rate (RR), tidal volume (VT), and EAdi. Detection of asynchrony events used waveform analysis and we calculated the asynchrony index as the number of asynchrony events divided by the number of neural cycles. RESULTS: We included 20 patients in the study. All patients passed the SBT in PSV, and three failed the SBT in NAVA. Five patients were reintubated and the extubation failure rate was 25% (95% CI 9-49%). Respiratory parameters were similar in the two modes: VT = 6.1 (5.5-6.5) mL/Kg in NAVA vs. 5.5 (4.8-6.1) mL/Kg in PSV (p = 0.076) and RR = 27 (17-30) rpm in NAVA vs. 26 (20-30) rpm in PSV, p = 0.55. NAVA reduced AI, with a median of 11.5% (4.2-19.7) compared to 24.3% (6.3-34.3) in PSV (p = 0.033). CONCLUSIONS: NAVA reduces patient-ventilator asynchrony index and generates a respiratory pattern similar to PSV during SBTs. Patients considered ready for mechanical ventilation liberation may be submitted to an SBT in NAVA using the same objective criteria used for SBTs in PSV. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT01337271 ), registered April 12, 2011.

Monitoring the electric activity of the diaphragm during noninvasive positive pressure ventilation: a case report.

BACKGROUND: In patients with post-extubation respiratory distress, delayed reintubation may worsen clinical outcomes. Objective measures of extubation failure at the bedside are lacking, therefore clinical parameters are currently used to guide the need of reintubation. Electrical activity of the diaphragm (EAdi) provides clinicians with valuable, objective information about respiratory drive and could be used to monitor respiratory effort. CASE PRESENTATION: We describe the case of a patient with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), from whom we recorded EAdi during four different ventilatory conditions: 1) invasive mechanical ventilation, 2) spontaneous breathing trial (SBT), 3) unassisted spontaneous breathing, and 4) Noninvasive Positive Pressure Ventilation (NPPV). The patient had been intubated due to an exacerbation of COPD, and after four days of mechanical ventilation, she passed the SBT and was extubated. Clinical signs of respiratory distress were present immediately after extubation, and EAdi increased compared to values obtained during mechanical ventilation. As we started NPPV, EAdi decreased substantially, indicating muscle unloading promoted by NPPV, and we used the EAdi signal to monitor respiratory effort during NPPV. Over the next three days, she was on NPPV for most of the time, with short periods of spontaneous breathing. EAdi remained considerably lower during NPPV than during spontaneous breathing, until the third day, when the difference was no longer clinically significant. She was then weaned from NPPV and discharged from the ICU a few days later. CONCLUSION: EAdi monitoring during NPPV provides an objective parameter of respiratory drive and respiratory muscle unloading and may be a useful tool to guide post-extubation ventilatory support. Clinical studies with continuous EAdi monitoring are necessary to clarify the meaning of its absolute values and changes over time.