Effect of positive end-expiratory pressure on functional residual capacity in two experimental models of acute respiratory distress syndrome

Objective Measurement of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP)-induced recruitment lung volume using passive spirometry is based on the assumption that the functional residual capacity (FRC) is not modified by the PEEP changes. We aimed to investigate the influence of PEEP on FRC in different mode...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of international medical research 2020-06, Vol.48 (6), p.300060520920426-300060520920426
Hauptverfasser: Wang, Yu-Mei, Sun, Xiu-Mei, Zhou, Yi-Min, Chen, Jing-Ran, Cheng, Kun-Ming, Li, Hong-Liang, Yang, Yan-Lin, Zhou, Jian-Xin
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Objective Measurement of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP)-induced recruitment lung volume using passive spirometry is based on the assumption that the functional residual capacity (FRC) is not modified by the PEEP changes. We aimed to investigate the influence of PEEP on FRC in different models of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Methods A randomized crossover study was performed in 12 pigs. Pulmonary (n = 6) and extra-pulmonary (n = 6) ARDS models were established using an alveolar instillation of hydrochloric acid and a right atrium injection of oleic acid, respectively. Low (5 cmH2O) and high (15 cmH2O) PEEP were randomly applied in each animal. FRC and recruitment volume were determined using the nitrogen wash-in/wash-out technique and release maneuver. Results FRC was not significantly different between the two PEEP levels in either pulmonary ARDS (299 ± 92 mL and 309 ± 130 mL at 5 and 15 cmH2O, respectively) or extra-pulmonary ARDS (305 ± 143 mL and 328 ± 197 mL at 5 and 15 cmH2O, respectively). The recruitment volume was not significantly different between the two models (pulmonary, 341 ± 100 mL; extra-pulmonary, 351 ± 170 mL). Conclusions PEEP did not influence FRC in either the pulmonary or extra-pulmonary ARDS pig model.
ISSN:0300-0605
1473-2300
DOI:10.1177/0300060520920426