Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Effects on Lung Gas Volume, Respiratory Mechanics and Gas Exchange of a Closed-Circuit Suctioning System during Volume- and Pressure-Controlled Ventilation in ARDS Patients.
Chiumello, Davide; Bolgiaghi, Luca; Formenti, Paolo; Pozzi, Tommaso; Lucenteforte, Manuela; Coppola, Silvia.
Afiliación
  • Chiumello D; Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, ASST Santi Paolo e Carlo, San Paolo University Hospital, Via di Rudini 9, 20122 Milan, Italy.
  • Bolgiaghi L; Department of Health Sciences, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy.
  • Formenti P; Coordinated Research Center on Respiratory Failure, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy.
  • Pozzi T; Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, ASST Santi Paolo e Carlo, San Paolo University Hospital, Via di Rudini 9, 20122 Milan, Italy.
  • Lucenteforte M; Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, ASST Santi Paolo e Carlo, San Paolo University Hospital, Via di Rudini 9, 20122 Milan, Italy.
  • Coppola S; Department of Health Sciences, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy.
J Clin Med ; 10(23)2021 Nov 30.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34884358
Mechanically ventilated patients periodically require endotracheal suctioning. There are conflicting data regarding the loss of lung gas volume caused by the application of a negative pressure by closed-circuit suctioning. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of suctioning performed by a closed-circuit system in ARDS patients during volume- or pressure-controlled ventilation. In this prospective crossover-design study, 18 ARDS patients were ventilated under volume and pressure control applied in random order. Gas exchange, respiratory mechanics and EIT-derived end-expiratory lung volume (EELV) before the suctioning manoeuvre and after 5, 15 and 30 min were recorded. The tidal volume and respiratory rate were similar in both ventilation modes; in volume control, the EELV decreased by 31 ± 23 mL, 5 min after the suctioning, but it remained similar after 15 and 30 min; the oxygenation, PaCO2 and respiratory system elastance did not change. In the pressure control, 5 min after suctioning, EELV decreased by 35 (26-46) mL, the PaO2/FiO2 did not change, while PaCO2 increased by 5 and 30 min after suctioning (45 (40-51) vs. 48 (43-52) and 47 (42-54) mmHg, respectively). Our results suggest minimal clinical advantages when a closed system is used in volume-controlled compared to pressure-controlled ventilation.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: J Clin Med Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Italia Pais de publicación: Suiza

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: J Clin Med Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Italia Pais de publicación: Suiza