A clinical study on the wean effect of setting parameters of proportional pressure support on acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with difficult weaning

Chengfen YIN; Lei XU; Xinjing GAO; Zhiyong WANG; Quansheng FENG; Yongle ZHI; Tong LI

ABSTRACT

Objective:

To investigate the clinical effect of setting proportional pressure support (PPS) parameters by target tidal volume (VT) method.

Methods:

The study was conducted retrospectively on acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) patients admitted to Tianjin Third Central Hospital from January 2016 to December 2020. According to the PPS parameter setting method, the patients were divided into the airway blocking group and target VT group. The baseline characteristics, initial setting values of flow assist (FA) and volume assist (VA), respiratory system parameters, and clinical outcomes were collected and compared between the two groups.

Results:

Fifty-nine patients were enrolled, 29 patients in the airway blocking group, and 30 in the target VT group. There was no statistically significant difference in baseline characteristics, compliance, resistance, and initial settings of FA and VA between the two groups. Compared with the target VT group, the respiratory rate (RR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), VT, and arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO 2) recorded 1 hour after the initial setting of the PPS parameters in the airway block method group were significantly reduced [RR (times/minute) 21.0 (18.5, 22.5) vs. 23.0 (21.0, 25.0), MAP (mmHg, 1 mmHg = 0.133 kPa) 84.0 (79.0, 90.5) vs. 90.0 (87.0, 96.2), VT (mL) 305.24±41.07 vs. 330.87±46.84, PaO 2 (mmHg) 68.0 (66.0, 73.5) vs. 74.0 (69.8, 82.5), all P < 0.05], while arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO 2) and oral closure pressure (P0.1) were both increased significantly [PaCO 2 (mmHg) 41.0 (39.0, 46.0) vs. 37.5 (35.0, 42.2), P0.1 (cmH 2O, 1 cmH 2O = 0.098 kPa) 1.42±0.78 vs. 0.90±0.67, both P < 0.05]. Compared with airway blocking group, the duration of weaning, ICU stay, and hospital stay in the target VT group were significantly shorter [duration of weaning (hours) 42.0 (24.0, 70.5) vs. 64.0 (30.5, 97.5), ICU stay 10.00±3.38 to 13.28±5.41, hospital stay (days) 12.07±3.40 vs. 15.41±5.60, all P < 0.05]. There was no statistically significant difference in the invasive mechanical ventilation time, weaning failure rate, ICU mortality and in-hospital mortality between the two groups.

Conclusion:

This study suggested that the target TV method has the advantages of practicality, safety, convenience, and rapid to set PPS parameters than the airway block method, which shortens the duration of weaning and ICU stay, and has a good clinical prospect.