o43imvh

Property	Value
?:abstract	BACKGROUND: Flow-controlled ventilation is a novel ventilation method which allows to individualize ventilation according to dynamic lung mechanic limits based on direct tracheal pressure measurement at a stable constant gas flow during inspiration and expiration. The aim of this porcine study was to compare individualized flow-controlled ventilation (FCV) and current guideline-conform pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) in long-term ventilation. METHODS: Anesthetized pigs were ventilated with either FCV or PCV over a period of 10 h with a fixed FiO(2) of 0.3. FCV settings were individualized by compliance-guided positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and peak pressure (P(peak)) titration. Flow was adjusted to maintain normocapnia and the inspiration to expiration ratio (I:E ratio) was set at 1:1. PCV was performed with a PEEP of 5 cm H(2)O and P(peak) was set to achieve a tidal volume (V(T)) of 7 ml/kg. The respiratory rate was adjusted to maintain normocapnia and the I:E ratio was set at 1:1.5. Repeated measurements during observation period were assessed by linear mixed-effects model. RESULTS: In FCV (n = 6), respiratory minute volume was significantly reduced (6.0 vs 12.7, MD − 6.8 (− 8.2 to − 5.4) l/min; p < 0.001) as compared to PCV (n = 6). Oxygenation was improved in the FCV group (paO(2) 119.8 vs 96.6, MD 23.2 (9.0 to 37.5) Torr; 15.97 vs 12.87, MD 3.10 (1.19 to 5.00) kPa; p = 0.010) and CO(2) removal was more efficient (paCO(2) 40.1 vs 44.9, MD − 4.7 (− 7.4 to − 2.0) Torr; 5.35 vs 5.98, MD − 0.63 (− 0.99 to − 0.27) kPa; p = 0.006). P(peak) and driving pressure were comparable in both groups, whereas PEEP was significantly lower in FCV (p = 0.002). Computed tomography revealed a significant reduction in non-aerated lung tissue in individualized FCV (p = 0.026) and no significant difference in overdistended lung tissue, although a significantly higher V(T) was applied (8.2 vs 7.6, MD 0.7 (0.2 to 1.2) ml/kg; p = 0.025). CONCLUSION: Our long-term ventilation study demonstrates the applicability of a compliance-guided individualization of FCV settings, which resulted in significantly improved gas exchange and lung tissue aeration without signs of overinflation as compared to best clinical practice PCV.
is ?:annotates of	<https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/entity/3o43imvh_hasAnnotation_C1412113> <https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/entity/3o43imvh_hasAnnotation_C1412491> <https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/entity/3o43imvh_hasAnnotation_C1424783>
?:creator	<https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/entity/Spraider%2C_Patrick%3B_Martini%2C_Judith%3B_Abram%2C_Julia%3B_Putzer%2C_Gabriel%3B_Glodny%2C_Bernhard%3B_Hell%2C_Tobias%3B_Barnes%2C_Tom%3B_Enk%2C_Dietmar>
?:doi	10.1186/s13054-020-03325-3
?:doi	<https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/entity/10.1186/s13054-020-03325-3>
?:externalLink	<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7686826/>
?:journal	Crit_Care
?:license	cc-by
?:pdf_json_files	document_parses/pdf_json/7b43a91b41700b835195196fdc8470f9d24818fa.json
?:pmc_json_files	document_parses/pmc_json/PMC7686826.xml.json
?:pmcid	<https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/entity/PMC7686826>
?:publication_isRelatedTo_Disease	<https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/entity/COVID-19>
?:sha_id	<https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/entity/7b43a91b41700b835195196fdc8470f9d24818fa>
?:source	PMC
?:title	Individualized flow-controlled ventilation compared to best clinical practice pressure-controlled ventilation: a prospective randomized porcine study
?:type	<https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/vocab/Publication>
?:year	2020-11-25

Property

Value

?:abstract

BACKGROUND: Flow-controlled ventilation is a novel ventilation method which allows to individualize ventilation according to dynamic lung mechanic limits based on direct tracheal pressure measurement at a stable constant gas flow during inspiration and expiration. The aim of this porcine study was to compare individualized flow-controlled ventilation (FCV) and current guideline-conform pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) in long-term ventilation. METHODS: Anesthetized pigs were ventilated with either FCV or PCV over a period of 10 h with a fixed FiO(2) of 0.3. FCV settings were individualized by compliance-guided positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and peak pressure (P(peak)) titration. Flow was adjusted to maintain normocapnia and the inspiration to expiration ratio (I:E ratio) was set at 1:1. PCV was performed with a PEEP of 5 cm H(2)O and P(peak) was set to achieve a tidal volume (V(T)) of 7 ml/kg. The respiratory rate was adjusted to maintain normocapnia and the I:E ratio was set at 1:1.5. Repeated measurements during observation period were assessed by linear mixed-effects model. RESULTS: In FCV (n = 6), respiratory minute volume was significantly reduced (6.0 vs 12.7, MD − 6.8 (− 8.2 to − 5.4) l/min; p < 0.001) as compared to PCV (n = 6). Oxygenation was improved in the FCV group (paO(2) 119.8 vs 96.6, MD 23.2 (9.0 to 37.5) Torr; 15.97 vs 12.87, MD 3.10 (1.19 to 5.00) kPa; p = 0.010) and CO(2) removal was more efficient (paCO(2) 40.1 vs 44.9, MD − 4.7 (− 7.4 to − 2.0) Torr; 5.35 vs 5.98, MD − 0.63 (− 0.99 to − 0.27) kPa; p = 0.006). P(peak) and driving pressure were comparable in both groups, whereas PEEP was significantly lower in FCV (p = 0.002). Computed tomography revealed a significant reduction in non-aerated lung tissue in individualized FCV (p = 0.026) and no significant difference in overdistended lung tissue, although a significantly higher V(T) was applied (8.2 vs 7.6, MD 0.7 (0.2 to 1.2) ml/kg; p = 0.025). CONCLUSION: Our long-term ventilation study demonstrates the applicability of a compliance-guided individualization of FCV settings, which resulted in significantly improved gas exchange and lung tissue aeration without signs of overinflation as compared to best clinical practice PCV.

is ?:annotates of