scholarly journals Inverse ratio ventilation for a case of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 271-272
Author(s):  
Ken Tonai ◽  
Shinshu Katayama ◽  
Shin Nunomiya ◽  
Jun Shima ◽  
Yuya Goto ◽  
...  
2001 ◽  
Vol 95 (5) ◽  
pp. 1182-1188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chung-Chi Huang ◽  
Mei-Ju Shih ◽  
Ying-Huang Tsai ◽  
Yu-Chen Chang ◽  
Thomas C. Y. Tsao ◽  
...  

Background In patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome, whether inverse ratio ventilation differs from high positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) for gas exchange under a similar mean airway pressure has not been adequately examined. The authors used arterial oxygenation, gastric intramucosal partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PiCO(2)), and pH (pHi) to assess whether pressure-controlled inverse ratio ventilation (PC-IRV) offers more benefits than pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) with PEEP. Methods Seventeen acute respiratory distress syndrome patients were enrolled and underwent mechanical ventilation with a PCV inspiratory-to-expiratory ratio of 1:2, followed by PC-IRV 1:1 initially. Then, they were randomly assigned to receive PC-IRV 2:1, then 4:1 or 4:1, and then 2:1, alternately. The baseline setting of PCV 1:2 was repeated between the settings of PC-IRV 2:1 and 4:1. Mean airway pressure and tidal volume were kept constant by adjusting the levels of peak inspiratory pressure and applied PEEP. In each ventilatory mode, hemodynamics, pulmonary mechanics, arterial and mixed venous blood gas analysis, PiCO(2), and pHi were measured after a 1-h period of stabilization. Results With a constant mean airway pressure, PC-IRV 2:1 and 4:1 decreased arterial and mixed venous oxygenation as compared with baseline PCV 1:2. Neither the global oxygenation indices with oxygen delivery and uptake nor PiCO(2) and pHi were improved by PC-IRV. During PC-IRV, applied PEEP was lower, and auto-PEEP was higher. Conclusion When substituting inverse ratio ventilation for applied PEEP to keep mean airway pressure constant, PC-IRV does not contribute more to better gas exchange and gastric intramucosal PiCO(2) and pHi than does PCV 1:2 for acute respiratory distress syndrome patients, regardless of the inspiratory-to-expiratory ratios.


2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (10) ◽  
pp. 418-421
Author(s):  
Christopher Werlein ◽  
Peter Braubach ◽  
Vincent Schmidt ◽  
Nicolas J. Dickgreber ◽  
Bruno Märkl ◽  
...  

ZUSAMMENFASSUNGDie aktuelle COVID-19-Pandemie verzeichnet mittlerweile über 18 Millionen Erkrankte und 680 000 Todesfälle weltweit. Für die hohe Variabilität sowohl der Schweregrade des klinischen Verlaufs als auch der Organmanifestationen fanden sich zunächst keine pathophysiologisch zufriedenstellenden Erklärungen. Bei schweren Krankheitsverläufen steht in der Regel eine pulmonale Symptomatik im Vordergrund, meist unter dem Bild eines „acute respiratory distress syndrome“ (ARDS). Darüber hinaus zeigen sich jedoch in unterschiedlicher Häufigkeit Organmanifestationen in Haut, Herz, Nieren, Gehirn und anderen viszeralen Organen, die v. a. durch eine Perfusionsstörung durch direkte oder indirekte Gefäßwandschädigung zu erklären sind. Daher wird COVID-19 als vaskuläre Multisystemerkrankung aufgefasst. Vor dem Hintergrund der multiplen Organmanifestationen sind klinisch-pathologische Obduktionen eine wichtige Grundlage der Entschlüsselung der Pathomechanismen von COVID-19 und auch ein Instrument zur Generierung und Hinterfragung innovativer Therapieansätze.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document