Differential Effects of Intra-Abdominal Hypertension and ARDS on Respiratory Mechanics in a Porcine Model.

Background and Objectives: Intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are common concerns in intensive care unit patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF). Although both conditions lead to impairment of global respiratory parameters, their underlying mechanisms differ substantially. Therefore, a separate assessment of the different respiratory compartments should reveal differences in respiratory mechanics. Materials and Methods: We prospectively investigated alterations in lung and chest wall mechanics in 18 mechanically ventilated pigs exposed to varying levels of intra-abdominal pressures (IAP) and ARDS. The animals were divided into three groups: group A (IAP 10 mmHg, no ARDS), B (IAP 20 mmHg, no ARDS), and C (IAP 10 mmHg, with ARDS). Following induction of IAP (by inflating an intra-abdominal balloon) and ARDS (by saline lung lavage and injurious ventilation), respiratory mechanics were monitored for six hours. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way ANOVA to compare the alterations within each group. Results: After six hours of ventilation, end-expiratory lung volume (EELV) decreased across all groups, while airway and thoracic pressures increased. Significant differences were noted between group (B) and (C) regarding alterations in transpulmonary pressure (TPP) (2.7 ± 0.6 vs. 11.3 ± 2.1 cmH2O, p < 0.001), elastance of the lung (EL) (8.9 ± 1.9 vs. 29.9 ± 5.9 cmH2O/mL, p = 0.003), and elastance of the chest wall (ECW) (32.8 ± 3.2 vs. 4.4 ± 1.8 cmH2O/mL, p < 0.001). However, global respiratory parameters such as EELV/kg bodyweight (-6.1 ± 1.3 vs. -11.0 ± 2.5 mL/kg), driving pressure (12.5 ± 0.9 vs. 13.2 ± 2.3 cmH2O), and compliance of the respiratory system (-21.7 ± 2.8 vs. -19.5 ± 3.4 mL/cmH2O) did not show significant differences among the groups. Conclusions: Separate measurements of lung and chest wall mechanics in pigs with IAH or ARDS reveals significant differences in TPP, EL, and ECW, whereas global respiratory parameters do not differ significantly. Therefore, assessing the compartments of the respiratory system separately could aid in identifying the underlying cause of ARF.

Impact of Different Positive End-Expiratory Pressures on Lung Mechanics in the Setting of Moderately Elevated Intra-Abdominal Pressure and Acute Lung Injury in a Porcine Model.

The effects of a moderately elevated intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) on lung mechanics in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) have still not been fully analyzed. Moreover, the optimal positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in elevated IAP and ARDS is unclear. In this paper, 18 pigs under general anesthesia received a double hit lung injury. After saline lung lavage and 2 h of injurious mechanical ventilation to induce an acute lung injury (ALI), an intra-abdominal balloon was filled until an IAP of 10 mmHg was generated. Animals were randomly assigned to one of three groups (group A = PEEP 5, B = PEEP 10 and C = PEEP 15 cmH2O) and ventilated for 6 h. We measured end-expiratory lung volume (EELV) per kg bodyweight, driving pressure (ΔP), transpulmonary pressure (ΔPL), static lung compliance (Cstat), oxygenation (P/F ratio) and cardiac index (CI). In group A, we found increases in ΔP (22 ± 1 vs. 28 ± 2 cmH2O; p = 0.006) and ΔPL (16 ± 1 vs. 22 ± 2 cmH2O; p = 0.007), with no change in EELV/kg (15 ± 1 vs. 14 ± 1 mL/kg) when comparing hours 0 and 6. In group B, there was no change in ΔP (26 ± 2 vs. 25 ± 2 cmH2O), ΔPL (19 ± 2 vs. 18 ± 2 cmH2O), Cstat (21 ± 3 vs. 21 ± 2 cmH2O/mL) or EELV/kg (12 ± 2 vs. 13 ± 3 mL/kg). ΔP and ΔPL were significantly lower after 6 h when comparing between group C and A (21 ± 1 vs. 28 ± 2 cmH2O; p = 0.020) and (14 ± 1 vs. 22 ± 2 cmH2O; p = 0.013)). The EELV/kg increased over time in group C (13 ± 1 vs. 19 ± 2 mL/kg; p = 0.034). The P/F ratio increased in all groups over time. CI decreased in groups B and C. The global lung injury score did not significantly differ between groups (A: 0.25 ± 0.05, B: 0.21 ± 0.02, C: 0.22 ± 0.03). In this model of ALI, elevated IAP, ΔP and ΔPL increased further over time in the group with a PEEP of 5 cmH2O applied over 6 h. This was not the case in the groups with a PEEP of 10 and 15 cmH2O. Although ΔP and ΔPL were significantly lower after 6 hours in group C compared to group A, we could not show significant differences in histological lung injury score.

Prospective Observational Study to Evaluate the Effect of Different Levels of Positive End-Expiratory Pressure on Lung Mechanics in Patients with and without Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: The optimal level of positive end-expiratory pressure is still under debate. There are scare data examining the association of PEEP with transpulmonary pressure (TPP), end-expiratory lung volume (EELV) and intraabdominal pressure in ventilated patients with and without ARDS. METHODS: We analyzed lung mechanics in 3 patient groups: group A, patients with ARDS; group B, obese patients (body mass index (BMI) > 30 kg/m2) and group C, a control group. Three levels of PEEP (5, 10, 15 cm H2O) were used to investigate the consequences for lung mechanics. RESULTS: Fifty patients were included, 22 in group A, 18 in group B (BMI 38 ± 2 kg/m2) and 10 in group C. At baseline, oxygenation showed no differences between the groups. Driving pressure (ΔP) and transpulmonary pressure (ΔPL) was higher in group B than in groups A and C at a PEEP of 5 cm H2O (ΔP A: 15 ± 1, B: 18 ± 1, C: 14 ± 1 cm H2O; ΔPL A: 10 ± 1, B: 13 ± 1, C: 9 ± 0 cm H2O). Peak inspiratory pressure (Pinsp) rose in all groups as PEEP increased, but the resulting driving pressure and transpulmonary pressure were reduced, whereas EELV increased. CONCLUSION: Measuring EELV or TPP allows a personalized approach to lung-protective ventilation.

Effect of moderate elevated intra-abdominal pressure on lung mechanics and histological lung injury at different positive end-expiratory pressures.

INTRODUCTION: Intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) is a well-known phenomenon in critically ill patients. Effects of a moderately elevated intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) on lung mechanics are still not fully analyzed. Moreover, the optimal positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in elevated IAP is unclear. METHODS: We investigated changes in lung mechanics and transformation in histological lung patterns using three different PEEP levels in eighteen deeply anesthetized pigs with an IAP of 10 mmHg. After establishing the intra-abdominal pressure, we randomized the animals into 3 groups. Each of n = 6 (Group A = PEEP 5, B = PEEP 10 and C = PEEP 15 cmH2O). End-expiratory lung volume (EELV/kg body weight (bw)), pulmonary compliance (Cstat), driving pressure (ΔP) and transpulmonary pressure (ΔPL) were measured for 6 hours. Additionally, the histological lung injury score was calculated. RESULTS: Comparing hours 0 and 6 in group A, there was a decrease of EELV/kg (27±2 vs. 16±1 ml/kg; p<0.05) and of Cstat (42±2 vs. 27±1 ml/cmH2O; p<0.05) and an increase of ΔP (11±0 vs. 17±1 cmH2O; p<0.05) and ΔPL (6±0 vs. 10±1 cmH2O; p<0.05). In group B, there was no significant change in EELV/kg (27±3 vs. 24±3 ml/kg), but a decrease in Cstat (42±3 vs. 32±1 ml/cmH20; p<0.05) and an increase in ΔP (11±1 vs. 15±1 cmH2O; p<0.05) and ΔPL (5±1 vs. 7±0 cmH2O; p<0.05). In group C, there were no significant changes in EELV/kg (27±2 vs. 29±3 ml/kg), ΔP (10±1 vs. 12±1 cmH2O) and ΔPL (5±1 vs. 7±1 cmH2O), but a significant decrease of Cstat (43±1 vs. 37±1 ml/cmH2O; p<0.05). Histological lung injury score was lowest in group B. CONCLUSIONS: A moderate elevated IAP of 10 mmHg leads to relevant changes in lung mechanics during mechanical ventilation. In our study, a PEEP of 10 cmH2O was associated with a lower lung injury score and was able to overcome the IAP induced alterations of EELV.