PURPOSE: Optimal esophageal balloon filling volume (Vbest) depends on the intrathoracic pressure. During Sigh breath delivered by the ventilator machine, esophageal balloon is surrounded by elevated intrathoracic pressure that might require higher filling volume for accurate measure of tidal changes in esophageal pressure (Pes). The primary aim of our investigation was to evaluate and compare Vbest during volume controlled and pressure support breaths vs. Sigh breath.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty adult patients requiring invasive volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) for hypoxemic acute respiratory failure were enrolled. After the insertion of a naso-gastric catheter equipped with 10ml esophageal balloon, each patient underwent three 30-min trials as follows: VCV, pressure support ventilation (PSV), and PSV+Sigh. Sigh was added to PSV as 35 cmH2O pressure-controlled breath over 4s, once per minute. PSV and PSV+Sigh were randomly applied and, at the end of each step, esophageal balloon calibration was performed.RESULTS: Vbest was higher for Sigh breath (4.5 [3.0-6.8] ml) compared to VCV (1.5 [1.0-2.9] ml, P=0.0004) and PSV tidal breath (1.0 [0.5-2.4] ml, P<0.0001).CONCLUSIONS: During Sigh breath, applying a calibrated approach for Pes assessment, a higher Vbest was required compared to VCV and PSV tidal breath.
Esophageal balloon calibration during Sigh: A physiologic, randomized, cross-over study
Cammarota, Gianmaria
;Santangelo, Erminio;Verdina, Federico;Boniolo, Ester;De Vita, Nello;Tarquini, Riccardo;Zanoni, Marta;Corte, Francesco Della;Vaschetto, Rosanna;
2020-01-01
Abstract
PURPOSE: Optimal esophageal balloon filling volume (Vbest) depends on the intrathoracic pressure. During Sigh breath delivered by the ventilator machine, esophageal balloon is surrounded by elevated intrathoracic pressure that might require higher filling volume for accurate measure of tidal changes in esophageal pressure (Pes). The primary aim of our investigation was to evaluate and compare Vbest during volume controlled and pressure support breaths vs. Sigh breath.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty adult patients requiring invasive volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) for hypoxemic acute respiratory failure were enrolled. After the insertion of a naso-gastric catheter equipped with 10ml esophageal balloon, each patient underwent three 30-min trials as follows: VCV, pressure support ventilation (PSV), and PSV+Sigh. Sigh was added to PSV as 35 cmH2O pressure-controlled breath over 4s, once per minute. PSV and PSV+Sigh were randomly applied and, at the end of each step, esophageal balloon calibration was performed.RESULTS: Vbest was higher for Sigh breath (4.5 [3.0-6.8] ml) compared to VCV (1.5 [1.0-2.9] ml, P=0.0004) and PSV tidal breath (1.0 [0.5-2.4] ml, P<0.0001).CONCLUSIONS: During Sigh breath, applying a calibrated approach for Pes assessment, a higher Vbest was required compared to VCV and PSV tidal breath.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
