Positive end-expiratory pressure-induced recruited lung volume measured by volume-pressure curves in acute respiratory distress syndrome: a physiologic systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Recruitment of lung volume is often cited as the reason for using positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients. We performed a systematic review on PEEP-induced recruited lung volume measured from inspiratory volume-pressure (VP) curves in ARDS patients to assess the prevalence of patients with PEEP-induced recruited lung volume and the mortality in recruiters and non-recruiters. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of PubMed to identify studies including ARDS patients in which the intervention of an increase in PEEP was accompanied by measurement of the recruited volume (Vrec increase versus no increase) using the VP curve in order to assess the relation between Vrec and mortality at ICU discharge. We first analysed the pooled data from the papers identified and then analysed individual patient level data received from the authors via personal contact. The risk of bias of the included papers was assessed using the quality in prognosis studies tool and the certainty of the evidence regarding the relationship of mortality to Vrec by the GRADE approach. Recruiters were defined as patients with a Vrec > 150 ml. A random effects model was used for the pooled data. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used for individual patient data. RESULTS: We identified 16 papers with a total of 308 patients for the pooled data meta-analysis and 14 papers with a total of 384 patients for the individual data analysis. The quality of the articles was moderate. In the pooled data, the prevalence of recruiters was 74% and the mortality was not significantly different between recruiters and non-recruiters (relative risk 1.20 [95% confidence intervals 0.88-1.63]). The certainty of the evidence regarding this association was very low and publication bias evident. In the individual data, the prevalence of recruiters was 70%. In the multivariable logistic regression, Vrec was not associated with mortality but Simplified Acute Physiology Score II and driving pressure at PEEP of 5 cmH2O were. CONCLUSION: After a PEEP increment, most patients are recruiters. Vrec was not associated with ICU mortality. The presence of similar findings in the individual patient level analysis and the driving pressure at PEEP of 5 cmH2O was associated with mortality as previously reported validate our findings. Publication bias and the lack of prospective studies suggest more research is required.

A Comprehensive Bench Assessment of Automatic Tube Compensation in ICU Ventilators for Better Clinical Management.

BACKGROUND: Automatic tube compensation (ATC) unloads endotracheal tube (ETT) resistance. We conducted a bench assessment of ATC functionality in ICU ventilators to improve clinical management. METHODS: This study had 2 phases. First, we performed an international survey on the use of ATC in clinical practice, hypothesizing a rate of ATC use of 25%. Second, we tested 7 modern ICU ventilators in a lung model mimicking a normal subject (Normal), a subject with ARDS, and a subject with COPD. Inspiratory effort consisted of esophageal pressure over 30 consecutive breaths obtained in a real patient under weaning. A brand new 8-mm inner diameter ETT was attached to the lung model, and ATC was set at 100% compensation for the ETT. The 30 breaths were first run with ATC off and no ETT (ie, reference period), and then with ATC on and ETT (ie, active period). The primary end point was the difference in tidal volume (VT) between reference and active periods. We hypothesized that the VT difference should be equal to 0 in an ideally functioning ATC. VT difference was compared across ventilators and respiratory mechanics conditions using a linear mixed-effects model. RESULTS: The clinical use of ATC was 64% according to 644 individuals who responded to the international survey. The VT difference varied significantly across ventilators in all respiratory mechanics configurations. The divergence between VT difference and 0 was small but significant: the extreme median (interquartile range) values were -0.013 L (-0.019 to -0.002) in the COPD model and 0.056 L (0.051-0.06) in the Normal model. VT difference for all ventilators was 0.015 L (95% CI 0.013-0.018) in the ARDS model, which was significantly different from 0.021 L (95% CI 0.018-0.024) in the Normal model (P < .001) and 0.010 L (0.007-0.012) in the COPD model (P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: ATC is used more frequently in clinical practice than expected. In addition, VT delivery by ATC differed slightly though significantly between ventilators.

Lung and chest wall mechanics in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome, expiratory flow limitation, and airway closure.

Tidal expiratory flow limitation (EFL), which may herald airway closure (AC), is a mechanism of loss of aeration in ARDS. In this prospective, short-term, two-center study, we measured static and dynamic chest wall (Est,cw and Edyn,cw) and lung (Est,L and Edyn,L) elastance with esophageal pressure, EFL, and AC at 5 cmH2O positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in intubated, sedated, and paralyzed ARDS patients. For EFL determination, we used the atmospheric method and a new device allowing comparison of tidal flow during expiration to PEEP and to atmosphere. AC was validated when airway opening pressure (AOP) assessed from volume-pressure curve was found greater than PEEP by at least 1 cmH2O. EFL was defined whenever flow did not increase between exhalation to PEEP and to atmosphere over all or part of expiration. Elastance values were expressed as percentage of normal predicted values (%N). Among the 25 patients included, eight had EFL (32%) and 13 AOP (52%). Between patients with and without EFL Edyn,cw [median (1st to 3rd quartiles)] was 70 (16-127) and 102 (70-142) %N (P = 0.32) and Edyn,L338 (332-763) and 224 (160-275) %N (P < 0.001). The corresponding values for Est,cw and Est,L were 70 (56-88) and 85 (64-103) %N (P = 0.35) and 248 (206-348) and 170 (144-195) (P = 0.02), respectively. Dynamic EL had an area receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.88 [95% confidence intervals 0.83-0.92] for EFL and 0.74[0.68-0.79] for AOP. Higher Edyn,L was accurate to predict EFL in ARDS patients; AC can occur independently of EFL, and both should be assessed concurrently in ARDS patients.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Expiratory flow limitation (EFL) and airway closure (AC) were observed in 32% and 52%, respectively, of 25 patients with ARDS investigated during mechanical ventilation in supine position with a positive end-expiratory pressure of 5 cmH2O. The performance of dynamic lung elastance to detect expiratory flow limitation was good and better than that to detect airway closure. The vast majority of patients with EFL also had AC; however, AC can occur in the absence of EFL.

Does endo-tracheal tube clamping prevent air leaks and maintain positive end-expiratory pressure during the switching of a ventilator in a patient in an intensive care unit? A bench study.

OBJECTIVES: When patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome are moved out of an intensive care unit, the ventilator often requires changing. This procedure suppresses positive end expiratory pressure and promotes lung derecruitment. Clamping the endotracheal tube may prevent this from occurring. Whether or not such clamping maintains positive end-expiratory pressure has never been investigated. We designed a bench study to explore this further. HOW THE STUDY WAS DONE: We used the Elysee 350 ventilator in 'volume controlled' mode with a positive end-expiratory pressure of 15 cmH2O, connected to an endotracheal tube with an 8 mm internal diameter inserted into a lung model with 40 ml/cmH2O compliance and 10 cmH2O/L/s resistance. We measured airway pressure and flow between the distal end of the endotracheal tube and the lung model. We tested a plastic, a metal, and an Extra Corporeal Membrane Oxygenation clamp, each with an oral/nasal, a nasal, and a reinforced endotracheal tube. We performed an end-expiratory hold then clamped the endotracheal tube and disconnected the ventilator. We measured the change in airway pressure and volume for 30 s following the disconnection of the ventilator. RESULTS: Airway pressure decreased thirty seconds after disconnection with all combinations of clamp and endotracheal tube. The largest fall in airway pressure (-17.486 cmH2O/s at 5 s and -18.834 cmH2O/s at 30 s) was observed with the plastic clamp combined with the reinforced endotracheal tube. The smallest decrease in airway pressure (0 cmH2O/s at 5 s and -0.163 cmH2O/s at 30 s) was observed using the Extra Corporeal Membrane Oxygenation clamp with the nasal endotracheal tube. CONCLUSIONS: Only the Extra Corporeal Membrane Oxygenation clamp was efficient. Even with an Extra Corporeal Membrane Oxygenation clamp, it is important to limit the duration the ventilator is disconnected to a few seconds (ideally 5 s).