Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
2.
BMC Anesthesiol ; 16: 3, 2016 Jan 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26757894

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Uncertainty persists regarding the optimal ventilatory strategy in trauma patients developing acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). This work aims to assess the effects of two mechanical ventilation strategies with high positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in experimental ARDS following blunt chest trauma. METHODS: Twenty-six juvenile pigs were anesthetized, tracheotomized and mechanically ventilated. A contusion was applied to the right chest using a bolt-shot device. Ninety minutes after contusion, animals were randomized to two different ventilation modes, applied for 24 h: Twelve pigs received conventional pressure-controlled ventilation with moderately low tidal volumes (VT, 8 ml/kg) and empirically chosen high external PEEP (16 cmH2O) and are referred to as the HP-CMV-group. The other group (n = 14) underwent high-frequency inverse-ratio pressure-controlled ventilation (HFPPV) involving respiratory rate of 65 breaths · min(-1), inspiratory-to-expiratory-ratio 2:1, development of intrinsic PEEP and recruitment maneuvers, compatible with the rationale of the Open Lung Concept. Hemodynamics, gas exchange and respiratory mechanics were monitored during 24 h. Computed tomography and histology were analyzed in subgroups. RESULTS: Comparing changes which occurred from randomization (90 min after chest trauma) over the 24-h treatment period, groups differed statistically significantly (all P values for group effect <0.001, General Linear Model analysis) for the following parameters (values are mean ± SD for randomization vs. 24-h): PaO2 (100% O2) (HFPPV 186 ± 82 vs. 450 ± 59 mmHg; HP-CMV 249 ± 73 vs. 243 ± 81 mmHg), venous admixture (HFPPV 34 ± 9.8 vs. 11.2 ± 3.7%; HP-CMV 33.9 ± 10.5 vs. 21.8 ± 7.2%), PaCO2 (HFPPV 46.9 ± 6.8 vs. 33.1 ± 2.4 mmHg; HP-CMV 46.3 ± 11.9 vs. 59.7 ± 18.3 mmHg) and normally aerated lung mass (HFPPV 42.8 ± 11.8 vs. 74.6 ± 10.0 %; HP-CMV 40.7 ± 8.6 vs. 53.4 ± 11.6%). Improvements occurring after recruitment in the HFPPV-group persisted throughout the study. Peak airway pressure and VT did not differ significantly. HFPPV animals had lower atelectasis and inflammation scores in gravity-dependent lung areas. CONCLUSIONS: In this model of ARDS following unilateral blunt chest trauma, HFPPV ventilation improved respiratory function and fulfilled relevant ventilation endpoints for trauma patients, i.e. restoration of oxygenation and lung aeration while avoiding hypercapnia and respiratory acidosis.


Assuntos
Respiração Artificial/métodos , Síndrome do Desconforto Respiratório/terapia , Mecânica Respiratória/fisiologia , Traumatismos Torácicos/terapia , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/terapia , Animais , Respiração com Pressão Positiva/métodos , Distribuição Aleatória , Síndrome do Desconforto Respiratório/etiologia , Síndrome do Desconforto Respiratório/fisiopatologia , Suínos , Traumatismos Torácicos/complicações , Traumatismos Torácicos/fisiopatologia , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/complicações , Ferimentos não Penetrantes/fisiopatologia
4.
Crit Care ; 15(1): R25, 2011.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21244659

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: The survival of patients admitted to an emergency department is determined by the severity of acute illness and the quality of care provided. The high number and the wide spectrum of severity of illness of admitted patients make an immediate assessment of all patients unrealistic. The aim of this study is to evaluate a scoring system based on readily available physiological parameters immediately after admission to an emergency department (ED) for the purpose of identification of at-risk patients. METHODS: This prospective observational cohort study includes 4,388 consecutive adult patients admitted via the ED of a 960-bed tertiary referral hospital over a period of six months. Occurrence of each of seven potential vital sign abnormalities (threat to airway, abnormal respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, systolic blood pressure, heart rate, low Glasgow Coma Scale and seizures) was collected and added up to generate the vital sign score (VSS). VSSinitial was defined as the VSS in the first 15 minutes after admission, VSSmax as the maximum VSS throughout the stay in ED. Occurrence of single vital sign abnormalities in the first 15 minutes and VSSinitial and VSSmax were evaluated as potential predictors of hospital mortality. RESULTS: Logistic regression analysis identified all evaluated single vital sign abnormalities except seizures and abnormal respiratory rate to be independent predictors of hospital mortality. Increasing VSSinitial and VSSmax were significantly correlated to hospital mortality (odds ratio (OR) 2.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.50 to 3.14, P < 0.0001 for VSSinitial; OR 2.36, 95% CI 2.15 to 2.60, P < 0.0001 for VSSmax). The predictive power of VSS was highest if collected in the first 15 minutes after ED admission (log rank Chi-square 468.1, P < 0.0001 for VSSinitial;,log rank Chi square 361.5, P < 0.0001 for VSSmax). CONCLUSIONS: Vital sign abnormalities and VSS collected in the first minutes after ED admission can identify patients at risk of an unfavourable outcome.


Assuntos
Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência/organização & administração , Admissão do Paciente , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Sinais Vitais/fisiologia , Adulto , Idoso , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Estudos Prospectivos , Medição de Risco/métodos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...