Oxygenation versus driving pressure for determining the best positive end-expiratory pressure in acute respiratory distress syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this prospective longitudinal study was to compare driving pressure and absolute PaO2/FiO2 ratio in determining the best positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) level. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In 122 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome, PEEP was increased until plateau pressure reached 30 cmH2O at constant tidal volume, then decreased at 15-min intervals, to 15, 10, and 5 cmH2O. The best PEEP by PaO2/FiO2 ratio (PEEPO2) was defined as the highest PaO2/FiO2 ratio obtained, and the best PEEP by driving pressure (PEEPDP) as the lowest driving pressure. The difference between the best PEEP levels was compared to a non-inferiority margin of 1.5 cmH2O. MAIN RESULTS: The best mean PEEPO2 value was 11.9 ± 4.7 cmH2O compared to 10.6 ± 4.1 cmH2O for the best PEEPDP: mean difference = 1.3 cmH2O (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.4-2.3; one-tailed P value, 0.36). Only 46 PEEP levels were the same with the two methods (37.7%; 95% CI 29.6-46.5). PEEP level was ≥ 15 cmH2O in 61 (50%) patients with PEEPO2 and 39 (32%) patients with PEEPDP (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Depending on the method chosen, the best PEEP level varies. The best PEEPDP level is lower than the best PEEPO2 level. Computing driving pressure is simple, faster and less invasive than measuring PaO2. However, our results do not demonstrate that one method deserves preference over the other in terms of patient outcome. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: #ACTRN12618000554268 . Registered 13 April 2018.

Transpulmonary thermodilution enables to detect small short-term changes in extravascular lung water induced by a bronchoalveolar lavage.

OBJECTIVE: To take the opportunity of a bronchoalveolar lavage to challenge the transpulmonary thermodilution for detecting the time course of changes in extravascular lung water. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Medical ICU. PATIENTS: Mechanically ventilated patients in whom a bronchoalveolar lavage by bronchoscopy was performed. INTERVENTION: Transpulmonary thermodilution before and after bronchoalveolar lavage. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Before and at different times after bronchoalveolar lavage, transpulmonary thermodilution was performed to record the value of indexed extravascular lung water. For each measurement, the values of three thermodilution measurements were averaged at the following steps: before bronchoalveolar lavage, after bronchoalveolar lavage, and 1 hour, 2 hours, 4 hours, and 6 hours after bronchoalveolar lavage. The amount of saline infusion left in the lungs after bronchoalveolar lavage was also recorded. Twenty-five patients with suspicion of pneumonia were included. Twenty-eight bronchoalveolar lavages were finally analyzed. On average, 200 mL (180-200 mL) of saline were injected and 130 mL (100-160 mL) were left in the lungs. Between before and immediately after bronchoalveolar lavage, indexed extravascular lung water significantly increased from 12 ± 4 to 15 ± 5 mL/kg, respectively, representing a 169 ± 166 mL increase in nonindexed extravascular lung water. After bronchoalveolar lavage, the value of indexed extravascular lung water was significantly different from the baseline value until 2 hours after bronchoalveolar lavage and became similar to the baseline value thereafter. CONCLUSIONS: Transpulmonary thermodilution enabled to detect small short-term changes of indexed extravascular lung water secondary to bronchoalveolar lavage.