Effect of body mass index in acute respiratory distress syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is associated in healthy subjects with a great reduction in functional residual capacity and with a stiffening of lung and chest wall elastance, which promote alveolar collapse and hypoxaemia. Likewise, obese patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) could present greater derangements of respiratory mechanics than patients of normal weight. METHODS: One hundred and one ARDS patients were enrolled. Partitioned respiratory mechanics and gas exchange were measured at 5 and 15 cm H2O of PEEP with a tidal volume of 6-8 ml kg(-1) of predicted body weight. At 5 and 45 cm H2O of PEEP, two lung computed tomography scans were performed. RESULTS: Patients were divided as follows according to BMI: normal weight (BMI≤25 kg m(-2)), overweight (BMI between 25 and 30 kg m(-2)), and obese (BMI>30 kg m(-2)). Obese, overweight, and normal-weight groups presented a similar lung elastance (median [interquartile range], respectively: 17.7 [14.2-24.8], 20.9 [16.1-30.2], and 20.5 [15.2-23.6] cm H2O litre(-1) at 5 cm H2O of PEEP and 19.3 [15.5-26.3], 21.1 [17.4-29.2], and 17.1 [13.4-20.4] cm H2O litre(-1) at 15 cm H2O of PEEP) and chest elastance (respectively: 4.9 [3.1-8.8], 5.9 [3.8-8.7], and 7.8 [3.9-9.8] cm H2O litre(-1) at 5 cm H2O of PEEP and 6.5 [4.5-9.6], 6.6 [4.2-9.2], and 4.9 [2.4-7.6] cm H2O litre(-1) at 15 cm H2O of PEEP). Lung recruitability was not affected by the body weight (15.6 [6.3-23.4], 15.7 [9.8-22.2], and 11.3 [6.2-15.6]% for normal-weight, overweight, and obese groups, respectively). Lung gas volume was significantly lower whereas total superimposed pressure was significantly higher in the obese compared with the normal-weight group (1148 [680-1815] vs 827 [686-1213] ml and 17.4 [15.8-19.3] vs 19.3 [18.6-21.7] cm H2O, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Obese ARDS patients do not present higher chest wall elastance and lung recruitability.

Esophageal pressure measurements under different conditions of intrathoracic pressure. An in vitro study of second generation balloon catheters.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate in vitro the accuracy of second generation esophageal catheters at different surrounding pressures and filling volumes and to suggest appropriate catheter management in clinical practice. METHODS: Six different esophageal catheters were placed in an experimental chamber at four chamber pressures (0, 10, 20 and 30 cmH2O) and at filling volumes ranging from 0 to 10 mL. The working volume was defined as the volume range between the maximum (Vmax) and minimum (Vmin) volumes achieving acceptable accuracy (defined by a balloon transmural pressure ± 1 cmH2O). Accuracy was evaluated for a standard volume of 0.5 mL and for volumes recommended by manufacturers. Data are shown as median and interquartile range. RESULTS: In the four conditions of chamber pressure Vmin, Vmax and working volume were 1.0 (0.5, 1.5), 5.3 (3.8, 7.1), and 3.5 (2.9, 6.1) mL. Increasing chamber pressure increased Vmin (rho=0.9; P<0.0001), that reached 2.0 mL (1.6-2.0) at 30 cmH2O. Vmax and working volumes differed among catheters, whereas Vmin did not. By injecting 0.5 mL and the minimum recommended volume by manufacturer, balloon transmural pressure was <-1 cmH2O in 71% and 53% of cases, it was negatively related to chamber pressure (rho=-0.97 and -0.71; P<0.0001) and reached values of -10.4 (-12.4, -9.7) and -9.8 (-10.6, -3.4) at 30 cmH2O. CONCLUSION: Measuring positive esophageal pressures needs higher injected volumes than usually recommended. The range of appropriate filling volumes is catheter-specific. Both absolute values and respiratory changes of esophageal pressure can be underestimated by an underfilled balloon.