RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Pressure support ventilation (PSV) is often associated with patient-ventilator asynchrony. Proportional assist ventilation (PAV) offers inspiratory assistance proportional to patient effort, minimizing patient-ventilator asynchrony. The objective of this study was to evaluate the influence of respiratory mechanics and patient effort on patient-ventilator asynchrony during PSV and PAV plus (PAV+). METHODS: We used a mechanical lung simulator and studied 3 respiratory mechanics profiles (normal, obstructive, and restrictive), with variations in the duration of inspiratory effort: 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 s. The Auto-Trak system was studied in ventilators when available. Outcome measures included inspiratory trigger delay, expiratory trigger asynchrony, and tidal volume (VT). RESULTS: Inspiratory trigger delay was greater in the obstructive respiratory mechanics profile and greatest with a effort of 2.0 s (160 ms); cycling asynchrony, particularly delayed cycling, was common in the obstructive profile, whereas the restrictive profile was associated with premature cycling. In comparison with PSV, PAV+ improved patient-ventilator synchrony, with a shorter triggering delay (28 ms vs 116 ms) and no cycling asynchrony in the restrictive profile. VT was lower with PAV+ than with PSV (630 mL vs 837 mL), as it was with the single-limb circuit ventilator (570 mL vs 837 mL). PAV+ mode was associated with longer cycling delays than were the other ventilation modes, especially for the obstructive profile and higher effort values. Auto-Trak eliminated automatic triggering. CONCLUSIONS: Mechanical ventilation asynchrony was influenced by effort, respiratory mechanics, ventilator type, and ventilation mode. In PSV mode, delayed cycling was associated with shorter effort in obstructive respiratory mechanics profiles, whereas premature cycling was more common with longer effort and a restrictive profile. PAV+ prevented premature cycling but not delayed cycling, especially in obstructive respiratory mechanics profiles, and it was associated with a lower VT.
Asunto(s)
Soporte Ventilatorio Interactivo/efectos adversos , Respiración con Presión Positiva/efectos adversos , Mecánica Respiratoria/fisiología , Ventiladores Mecánicos/efectos adversos , Humanos , Inhalación , Soporte Ventilatorio Interactivo/instrumentación , Soporte Ventilatorio Interactivo/métodos , Modelos Anatómicos , Respiración con Presión Positiva/instrumentación , Respiración con Presión Positiva/métodos , Volumen de Ventilación Pulmonar , Factores de TiempoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The digital Auto-Trak™ system is a technology capable of automatically adjusting the triggering and cycling mechanisms during pressure support ventilation (PSV). OBJECTIVE: To compare Auto-Trak with conventional settings in terms of patient-ventilator synchrony and discomfort. METHODS: Twelve healthy volunteers underwent PSV via the mouth by breathing through an endotracheal tube. In the conventional setting, a pressure support of 8 cm H2O with flow cycling (25% peak inspiratory flow) and a sensitivity of 1 cm H2O was adjusted. In Auto-Trak the triggering and cycling were automatically set. Discomfort, effort of breathing, and the asynchrony index (AI) were assessed. In a complementary bench study, the inspiratory and expiratory time delays were quantified for both settings in three mechanical models: 'normal', obstructive (COPD), and restrictive (ARDS), using the ASL 5000 simulator. RESULTS: In the volunteer study the AI and the discomfort scores did not differ statistically between the two settings. In the bench investigation the use of Auto-Trak was associated with a greater triggering delay in the COPD model and earlier expiratory cycling in the ARDS model but with no asynchronic events. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the Auto-Trak system during PSV showed similar results in comparison to the conventional adjustments with respect to patient-ventilator synchrony and discomfort in simulated conditions of invasive mechanical ventilation.