Clinical practices related to liberation from mechanical ventilation in Latin American pediatric intensive care units: survey of the Sociedad Latino-Americana de Cuidados Intensivos Pediátricos Mechanical Ventilation Liberation Group.

OBJECTIVE: To address the current practice of liberating patients from invasive mechanical ventilation in pediatric intensive care units, with a focus on the use of standardized protocols, criteria, parameters, and indications for noninvasive respiratory support postextubation. METHODS: Electronic research was carried out from November 2021 to May 2022 in Ibero-American pediatric intensive care units. Physicians and respiratory therapists participated, with a single representative for each pediatric intensive care unit included. There were no interventions. RESULTS: The response rate was 48.9% (138/282), representing 10 Ibero-American countries. Written invasive mechanical ventilation liberation protocols were available in only 34.1% (47/138) of the pediatric intensive care units, and their use was associated with the presence of respiratory therapists (OR 3.85; 95%CI 1.79 - 8.33; p = 0.0008). The most common method of liberation involved a gradual reduction in ventilatory support plus a spontaneous breathing trial (47.1%). The mean spontaneous breathing trial duration was 60 - 120 minutes in 64.8% of the responses. The presence of a respiratory therapist in the pediatric intensive care unit was the only variable associated with the use of a spontaneous breathing trial as the primary method of liberation from invasive mechanical ventilation (OR 5.1; 95%CI 2.1 - 12.5). Noninvasive respiratory support protocols were not frequently used postextubation (40.4%). Nearly half of the respondents (43.5%) reported a preference for using bilevel positive airway pressure as the mode of noninvasive ventilation postextubation. CONCLUSION: A high proportion of Ibero-American pediatric intensive care units lack liberation protocols. Our study highlights substantial variability in extubation readiness practices, underscoring the need for standardization in this process. However, the presence of a respiratory therapist was associated with increased adherence to guidelines.

Estimation of inspiratory effort using airway occlusion maneuvers in ventilated children: a secondary analysis of an ongoing randomized trial testing a lung and diaphragm protective ventilation strategy.

BACKGROUND: Monitoring respiratory effort in ventilated patients is important to balance lung and diaphragm protection. Esophageal manometry remains the gold standard for monitoring respiratory effort but is invasive and requires expertise for its measurement and interpretation. Airway pressures during occlusion maneuvers may provide an alternative, although pediatric data are limited. We sought to determine the correlation between change in esophageal pressure during tidal breathing (∆Pes) and airway pressure measured during three airway occlusion maneuvers: (1) expiratory occlusion pressure (Pocc), (2) airway occlusion pressure (P0.1), and (3) respiratory muscle pressure index (PMI) in children. We also sought to explore pediatric threshold values for these pressures to detect excessive or insufficient respiratory effort. METHODS: Secondary analysis of physiologic data from children between 1 month and 18 years of age with acute respiratory distress syndrome enrolled in an ongoing randomized clinical trial testing a lung and diaphragm protective ventilation strategy (REDvent, R01HL124666). ∆Pes, Pocc, P0.1, and PMI were measured. Repeated measure correlations were used to investigate correlation coefficients between ∆Pes and the three measures, and linear regression equations were generated to identify potential therapeutic thresholds. RESULTS: There were 653 inspiratory and 713 expiratory holds from 97 patients. Pocc had the strongest correlation with ∆Pes (r = 0.68), followed by PMI (r = 0.60) and P0.1 (r = 0.42). ∆Pes could be reliably estimated using the regression equation ∆Pes = 0.66 [Formula: see text] Pocc (R2 = 0.82), with Pocc cut-points having high specificity and moderate sensitivity to detect respective ∆Pes thresholds for high and low respiratory effort. There were minimal differences in the relationship between Pocc and ∆Pes based on age (infant, child, adolescent) or mode of ventilation (SIMV versus Pressure Support), although these differences were more apparent with P0.1 and PMI. CONCLUSIONS: Airway occlusion maneuvers may be appropriate alternatives to esophageal pressure measurement to estimate the inspiratory effort in children, and Pocc represents the most promising target. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03266016; August 23, 2017.