Airway pressure release ventilation increases cardiac performance in patients with acute lung injury/adult respiratory distress syndrome

Citation
Lj. Kaplan et al., Airway pressure release ventilation increases cardiac performance in patients with acute lung injury/adult respiratory distress syndrome, CRIT CARE, 5(4), 2001, pp. 221-226
Citations number
11
Categorie Soggetti
Aneshtesia & Intensive Care
Journal title
CRITICAL CARE
ISSN journal
1466609X → ACNP
Volume
5
Issue
4
Year of publication
2001
Pages
221 - 226
Database
ISI
SICI code
1466-609X(2001)5:4<221:APRVIC>2.0.ZU;2-8
Abstract
Background The purpose of the present study is to determine whether airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) can safely enhance hemodynamics in pati ents with acute lung injury (ALI) and/or adult respiratory distress syndrom e (ARDS), relative to pressure control ventilation (PCV). Methods Patients with severe acute lung injury or ARDS who were managed wit h inverse-ratio pressure control ventilation, neuromuscular blockade and a pulmonary artery catheter were switched to APRV. Hemodynamic performance, a s well as pressor and sedative needs, was assessed after discontinuing neur omuscular blockade Results Mean age was 58 +/- 9 years (n = 12) and mean Lung Injury Score was 7.6 +/- 2.1. Temperature and arterial oxygen tension/fractional inspired o xygen (FiO(2)) were similar among the patients. Peak airway pressures fell from 38 +/- 3 for PCV to 25 +/- 3 cmH(2)O for APRV, and mean pressures fell from 18 +/- 3 for PCV to 12 +/- 2 cmH(2)O for APRV. Paralytic use and seda tive use were significantly lower with APRV than with PCV. Pressor use decr eased substantially with ARPV. Lactate levels remained normal, but decrease d on APRV. Cardiac index rose from 3.2 +/- 0.4 for PCV to 4.6 +/- 0.3 l/min per m(2) body surface area (BSA) for APRV, whereas oxygen delivery increas ed from 997 +/- 108 for PCV to 1409 +/- 146 ml/min for APRV, and central ve nous pressure declined from 18 +/- 4 for PCV to 12 +/- 4 cmH(2)O for APRV. Urine output increased from 0.83 +/- 0.1 for PCV to 0.96 +/- 0.12 ml/kg per hour for APRV. Conclusion APRV may be used safely in patients with ALI/ARDS, and decreases the need for paralysis and sedation as compared with PCV-inverse ratio ven tilation (IRV). APRV increases cardiac performance, with decreased pressor use and decreased airway pressure, in patients with ALI/ARDS.