A survey of preferences for respiratory support in the intensive care unit for patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure.

BACKGROUND: When caring for mechanically ventilated adults with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure (AHRF), clinicians are faced with an uncertain choice between ventilator modes allowing for spontaneous breaths or ventilation fully controlled by the ventilator. The preferences of clinicians managing such patients, and what motivates their choice of ventilator mode, are largely unknown. To better understand how clinicians' preferences may impact the choice of ventilatory support for patients with AHRF, we issued a survey to an international network of intensive care unit (ICU) researchers. METHODS: We distributed an online survey with 32 broadly similar and interlinked questions on how clinicians prioritise spontaneous or controlled ventilation in invasively ventilated patients with AHRF of different severity, and which factors determine their choice. RESULTS: The survey was distributed to 1337 recipients in 12 countries. Of these, 415 (31%) completed the survey either fully (52%) or partially (48%). Most respondents were identified as medical specialists (87%) or physicians in training (11%). Modes allowing for spontaneous ventilation were considered preferable in mild AHRF, with controlled ventilation considered as progressively more important in moderate and severe AHRF. Among respondents there was strong support (90%) for a randomised clinical trial comparing spontaneous with controlled ventilation in patients with moderate AHRF. CONCLUSIONS: The responses from this international survey suggest that there is clinical equipoise for the preferred ventilator mode in patients with AHRF of moderate severity. We found strong support for a randomised trial comparing modes of ventilation in patients with moderate AHRF.

Neurological and respiratory effects of lung protective ventilation in acute brain injury patients without lung injury: brain vent, a single centre randomized interventional study.

INTRODUCTION: Lung protective ventilation (LPV) comprising low tidal volume (VT) and high positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) may compromise cerebral perfusion in acute brain injury (ABI). In patients with ABI, we investigated whether LPV is associated with increased intracranial pressure (ICP) and/or deranged cerebral autoregulation (CA), brain compensatory reserve and oxygenation. METHODS: In a prospective, crossover study, 30 intubated ABI patients with normal ICP and no lung injury were randomly assigned to receive low VT [6 ml/kg/predicted (pbw)]/at either low (5 cmH2O) or high PEEP (12 cmH2O). Between each intervention, baseline ventilation (VT 9 ml/kg/pbw and PEEP 5 cmH2O) were resumed. The safety limit for interruption of the intervention was ICP above 22 mmHg for more than 5 min. Airway and transpulmonary pressures were continuously monitored to assess respiratory mechanics. We recorded ICP by using external ventricular drainage or a parenchymal probe. CA and brain compensatory reserve were derived from ICP waveform analysis. RESULTS: We included 27 patients (intracerebral haemorrhage, traumatic brain injury, subarachnoid haemorrhage), of whom 6 reached the safety limit, which required interruption of at least one intervention. For those without intervention interruption, the ICP change from baseline to "low VT/low PEEP" and "low VT/high PEEP" were 2.2 mmHg and 2.3 mmHg, respectively, and considered clinically non-relevant. None of the interventions affected CA or oxygenation significantly. Interrupted events were associated with high baseline ICP (p < 0.001), low brain compensatory reserve (p < 0.01) and mechanical power (p < 0.05). The transpulmonary driving pressure was 5 ± 2 cmH2O in both interventions. Partial arterial pressure of carbon dioxide was kept in the range 34-36 mmHg by adjusting the respiratory rate, hence, changes in carbon dioxide were not associated with the increase in ICP. CONCLUSIONS: The present study found that most patients did not experience any adverse effects of LPV, neither on ICP nor CA. However, in almost a quarter of patients, the ICP rose above the safety limit for interrupting the interventions. Baseline ICP, brain compensatory reserve, and mechanical power can predict a potentially deleterious effect of LPV and can be used to personalize ventilator settings. Trial registration NCT03278769 . Registered September 12, 2017.

Brain monitoring in hospitals needs to be strengthened. / Hjerneovervåking i sykehusene må styrkes.

Careful brain monitoring saves lives and is beneficial to patients' health. Nevertheless, Norway lacks guidelines for brain monitoring in hospitals.

Autonomic Nervous System Activity during Refractory Rise in Intracranial Pressure.

Refractory intracranial hypertension (RIH) is a dramatic increase in intracranial pressure (ICP) that cannot be controlled by treatment. Recent reports suggest that the autonomic nervous system (ANS) activity may be altered during changes in ICP. Our study aimed to assess ANS activity during RIH and the causal relationship between rising in ICP and autonomic activity. We reviewed retrospectively 24 multicenter (Cambridge, Tromso, Berlin) patients in whom RIH developed as a pre-terminal event after acute brain injury (ABI). They were monitored with ICP, arterial blood pressure (ABP), and electrocardiography (ECG) using ICM+ software. Parameters reflecting autonomic activity were computed in time and frequency domain through the measurement of heart rate variability (HRV) and baroreflex sensitivity (BRS). Our results demonstrated that a rise in ICP was associated to a significant rise in HRV and BRS with a higher significance level in the high-frequency HRV (p < 0.001). This increase was followed by a significant decrease in HRV and BRS above the upper-breakpoint of ICP where ICP pulse-amplitude starts to decrease whereas the mean ICP continues to rise. Temporality measured with a Granger test suggests a causal relationship from ICP to ANS. The above results suggest that a rise in ICP interacts with ANS activity, mainly interfacing with the parasympathetic-system. The ANS seems to react to the rise in ICP with a response possibly focused on maintaining the cerebrovascular homeostasis. This happens until the critical threshold of ICP is reached above which the ANS variables collapse, probably because of low perfusion of the brain and the central autonomic network.