Asynchronies during mechanical ventilation are associated with mortality

This study aimed to assess the prevalence and time course of asynchronies during mechanical ventilation (MV). Prospective, noninterventional observational study of 50 patients admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) beds equipped with Better Care (TM) software throughout MV. The software distinguished ventilatory modes and detected ineffective inspiratory efforts during expiration (IEE), double-triggering, aborted inspirations, and short and prolonged cycling to compute the asynchrony index (AI) for each hour. We analyzed 7,027 h of MV comprising 8,731,981 breaths. Asynchronies were detected in all patients and in all ventilator modes. The median AI was 3.41 % [IQR 1.95-5.77]; the most common asynchrony overall and in each mode was IEE [2.38 % (IQR 1.36-3.61)]. Asynchronies were less frequent from 12 pm to 6 am [1.69 % (IQR 0.47-4.78)]. In the hours where more than 90 % of breaths were machine-triggered, the median AI decreased, but asynchronies were still present. When we compared patients with AI > 10 vs AI a parts per thousand currency sign 10 %, we found similar reintubation and tracheostomy rates but higher ICU and hospital mortality and a trend toward longer duration of MV in patients with an AI above the cutoff. Asynchronies are common throughout MV, occurring in all MV modes, and more frequently during the daytime. Further studies should determine whether asynchronies are a marker for or a cause of mortality

Effects on lung stress of position and different doses of perfluorocarbon in a model of ARDS

We determined whether the combination of low dose partial liquid ventilation (PLV) with perfluorocarbons (PFC) and prone positioning improved lung function while inducing minimal stress. Eighteen pigs with acute lung injury were assigned to conventional mechanical ventilation (CMV) or PLV (5 or 10 ml/kg of PFC). Positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) trials in supine and prone positions were performed. Data were analyzed by a multivariate polynomial regression model. The interplay between PLV and position depended on the PEEP level. In supine PLV dampened the stress induced by increased PEEP during the trial. The PFC dose of 5 ml/kg was more effective than the dose 10 ml/kg. This effect was not observed in prone. Oxygenation was significantly higher in prone than in supine position mainly at lower levels of PEEP. In conclusion, MV settings should take both gas exchange and stress/strain into account. When protective CMV fails, rescue strategies combining prone positioning and PLV with optimal PEEP should improve gas exchange with minimal stress. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved

Double cycling during mechanical ventilation: Frequency, mechanisms, and physiologic implications*

OBJECTIVES: Double cycling generates larger than expected tidal volumes that contribute to lung injury. We analyzed the incidence, mechanisms, and physiologic implications of double cycling during volume- and pressure-targeted mechanical ventilation in critically ill patients. DESIGN: Prospective, observational study. SETTING: Three general ICUs in Spain. PATIENTS: Sixty-seven continuously monitored adult patients undergoing volume control-continuous mandatory ventilation with constant flow, volume control-continuous mandatory ventilation with decelerated flow, or pressure control-continuous mandatory mechanical ventilation for longer than 24 hours. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We analyzed 9,251 hours of mechanical ventilation corresponding to 9,694,573 breaths. Double cycling occurred in 0.6%. All patients had double cycling; however, the distribution of double cycling varied over time. The mean percentage (95% CI) of double cycling was higher in pressure control-continuous mandatory ventilation 0.54 (0.34-0.87) than in volume control-continuous mandatory ventilation with constant flow 0.27 (0.19-0.38) or volume control-continuous mandatory ventilation with decelerated flow 0.11 (0.06-0.20). Tidal volume in double-cycled breaths was higher in volume control-continuous mandatory ventilation with constant flow and volume control-continuous mandatory ventilation with decelerated flow than in pressure control-continuous mandatory ventilation. Double-cycled breaths were patient triggered in 65.4% and reverse triggered (diaphragmatic contraction stimulated by a previous passive ventilator breath) in 34.6% of cases; the difference was largest in volume control-continuous mandatory ventilation with decelerated flow (80.7% patient triggered and 19.3% reverse triggered). Peak pressure of the second stacked breath was highest in volume control-continuous mandatory ventilation with constant flow regardless of trigger type. Various physiologic factors, none mutually exclusive, were associated with double cycling. CONCLUSIONS: Double cycling is uncommon but occurs in all patients. Periods without double cycling alternate with periods with clusters of double cycling. The volume of the stacked breaths can double the set tidal volume in volume control-continuous mandatory ventilation with constant flow. Gas delivery must be tailored to neuroventilatory demand because interdependent ventilator setting-related physiologic factors can contribute to double cycling. One third of double-cycled breaths were reverse triggered, suggesting that repeated respiratory muscle activation after time-initiated ventilator breaths occurs more often than expected