ABSTRACT
There is no universally accepted method for positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) titration approach for patients on spontaneous mechanical ventilation (SMV). Electrical impedance tomography (EIT) guided PEEP-titration has shown promising results in controlled mechanical ventilation (CMV), current implemented algorithm for PEEP titration (based on regional compliance measurements) is not applicable in SMV. Regional peak flow (RPF, defined as the highest inspiratory flow rate based on EIT at a certain PEEP level) is a new method for quantifying regional lung mechanics designed for SMV. The objective is to study whether RPF by EIT is a feasible method for PEEP titration during SMV. Single EIT measurements were performed in COVID-19 ARDS patients on SMV. Clinical (i.e., tidal volume, airway occlusion pressure, end-tidal CO2) and mechanical (cyclic alveolar recruitment, recruitment, cumulative overdistension (OD), cumulative collapse (CL), pendelluft, and PEEP) outcomes were determined by EIT at several pre-defined PEEP thresholds (1-10% CL and the intersection of the OD and CL curves) and outcomes at all thresholds were compared to the outcomes at baseline PEEP. In total, 25 patients were included. No significant and clinically relevant differences were found between thresholds for tidal volume, end-tidal CO2, and P0.1 compared to baseline PEEP; cyclic alveolar recruitment rates changed by -3.9% to -37.9% across thresholds; recruitment rates ranged from - 49.4% to + 79.2%; cumulative overdistension changed from - 75.9% to + 373.4% across thresholds; cumulative collapse changed from 0% to -94.3%; PEEP levels from 10 up to 14 cmH2O were observed across thresholds compared to baseline PEEP of 10 cmH2O. A threshold of approximately 5% cumulative collapse yields the optimum compromise between all clinical and mechanical outcomes. EIT-guided PEEP titration by the RPF approach is feasible and is linked to improved overall lung mechanics) during SMV using a threshold of approximately 5% CL. However, the long-term clinical safety and effect of this approach remain to be determined.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: From data collected during the third International Study on Mechanical Ventilation (ISMV), we compared data from a Dutch cohort with a European cohort. We hypothesised that tidal volumes were smaller and applied positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) was higher in the Netherlands, compared with the European cohort. We also compared use of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and outcomes in both cohorts. METHODS: A post-hoc analysis of a prospective observational study of patients receiving mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: Tidal volumes were smaller (7.6 vs. 8.1 ml÷kg predicted bodyweight) in the Dutch cohort and applied PEEP was higher (8 vs. 6 cm H2O). Fewer patients admitted in the Netherlands received NIV as first mode of mechanical ventilation (7.1 vs. 16.7%). Fewer patients in the Dutch cohort developed an ICU-acquired pneumonia (4.5 vs. 12.3%, p < 0.01) and sepsis (5.7 vs. 10.9%, p = 0.03), but more patients were diagnosed as having delirium (15.8 vs. 4.6%, p < 0.01). ICU and in-hospital mortality rates were 19% and 25%, respectively, in Dutch ICUs vs. 26% and 33% in Europe (p = 0.06 and 0.03). CONCLUSION: Tidal volumes were smaller and applied PEEP was higher in the Dutch cohort compared with international data, but both Dutch and international patients received larger tidal volumes than recommended for prevention or treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome. NIV as first mode of mechanical ventilation is less commonly used in the Netherlands. The incidence of ICU-acquired pneumonia is lower and of delirium higher in the Netherlands compared with international data.