使用两种不同的自主呼吸试验比较肺通气和呼吸强度:T形通气与压力支持通气

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Medicina Intensiva Pub Date : 2024-08-28 DOI:10.1016/j.medin.2023.06.015
Raquel Bosch-Compte , Francisco José Parrilla , Rosana Muñoz-Bermúdez , Irene Dot , Cristina Climent , Joan Ramon Masclans , Judith Marin-Corral , Purificación Pérez-Terán
{"title":"使用两种不同的自主呼吸试验比较肺通气和呼吸强度:T形通气与压力支持通气","authors":"Raquel Bosch-Compte ,&nbsp;Francisco José Parrilla ,&nbsp;Rosana Muñoz-Bermúdez ,&nbsp;Irene Dot ,&nbsp;Cristina Climent ,&nbsp;Joan Ramon Masclans ,&nbsp;Judith Marin-Corral ,&nbsp;Purificación Pérez-Terán","doi":"10.1016/j.medin.2023.06.015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To assess the changes in lung aeration and respiratory effort generated by two different spontaneous breathing trial (SBT): T-piece (T-T) vs pressure support ventilation (PSV).</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>Prospective, interventionist and randomized study.</p></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><p>Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of Hospital del Mar.</p></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><p>Forty-three ventilated patients for at least 24 h and considered eligible for an SBT were included in the study between October 2017 and March 2020.</p></div><div><h3>Interventions</h3><p>30-min SBT with T-piece (T-T group, 20 patients) or 8-cmH<sub>2</sub>O PSV and 5-cmH<sub>2</sub>O positive end expiratory pressure (PSV group, 23 patients).</p></div><div><h3>Main variables of interest</h3><p>Demographics, clinical data, physiological variables, lung aeration evaluated with electrical impedance tomography (EIT) and lung ultrasound (LUS), and respiratory effort using diaphragmatic ultrasonography (DU) were collected at different timepoints: basal (BSL), end of SBT (EoSBT) and one hour after extubation (OTE).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>There were a loss of aeration measured with EIT and LUS in the different study timepoints, without statistical differences from BSL to OTE, between T-T and PSV [LUS: 3 (1, 5.5) AU vs 2 (1, 3) AU; p = 0.088; EELI: −2516.41 (−5871.88, 1090.46) AU vs −1992.4 (−3458.76, −5.07) AU; p = 0.918]. Percentage of variation between BSL and OTE, was greater when LUS was used compared to EIT (68.1% vs 4.9%, p ≤ 0.001). Diaphragmatic excursion trend to decrease coinciding with a loss of aeration during extubation.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>T-T and PSV as different SBT strategies in ventilated patients do not show differences in aeration loss, nor estimated respiratory effort or tidal volume measured by EIT, LUS and DU.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49268,"journal":{"name":"Medicina Intensiva","volume":"48 9","pages":"Pages 501-510"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing lung aeration and respiratory effort using two different spontaneous breathing trial: T-piece vs pressure support ventilation\",\"authors\":\"Raquel Bosch-Compte ,&nbsp;Francisco José Parrilla ,&nbsp;Rosana Muñoz-Bermúdez ,&nbsp;Irene Dot ,&nbsp;Cristina Climent ,&nbsp;Joan Ramon Masclans ,&nbsp;Judith Marin-Corral ,&nbsp;Purificación Pérez-Terán\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.medin.2023.06.015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To assess the changes in lung aeration and respiratory effort generated by two different spontaneous breathing trial (SBT): T-piece (T-T) vs pressure support ventilation (PSV).</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>Prospective, interventionist and randomized study.</p></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><p>Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of Hospital del Mar.</p></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><p>Forty-three ventilated patients for at least 24 h and considered eligible for an SBT were included in the study between October 2017 and March 2020.</p></div><div><h3>Interventions</h3><p>30-min SBT with T-piece (T-T group, 20 patients) or 8-cmH<sub>2</sub>O PSV and 5-cmH<sub>2</sub>O positive end expiratory pressure (PSV group, 23 patients).</p></div><div><h3>Main variables of interest</h3><p>Demographics, clinical data, physiological variables, lung aeration evaluated with electrical impedance tomography (EIT) and lung ultrasound (LUS), and respiratory effort using diaphragmatic ultrasonography (DU) were collected at different timepoints: basal (BSL), end of SBT (EoSBT) and one hour after extubation (OTE).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>There were a loss of aeration measured with EIT and LUS in the different study timepoints, without statistical differences from BSL to OTE, between T-T and PSV [LUS: 3 (1, 5.5) AU vs 2 (1, 3) AU; p = 0.088; EELI: −2516.41 (−5871.88, 1090.46) AU vs −1992.4 (−3458.76, −5.07) AU; p = 0.918]. Percentage of variation between BSL and OTE, was greater when LUS was used compared to EIT (68.1% vs 4.9%, p ≤ 0.001). Diaphragmatic excursion trend to decrease coinciding with a loss of aeration during extubation.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>T-T and PSV as different SBT strategies in ventilated patients do not show differences in aeration loss, nor estimated respiratory effort or tidal volume measured by EIT, LUS and DU.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49268,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medicina Intensiva\",\"volume\":\"48 9\",\"pages\":\"Pages 501-510\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medicina Intensiva\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0210569123002140\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicina Intensiva","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0210569123002140","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的评估两种不同的自主呼吸试验(SBT)所产生的肺通气量和呼吸强度的变化:干预使用T-piece(T-T组,20名患者)或8-cmH2O PSV和5-cmH2O呼气末正压(PSV组,23名患者)进行30分钟SBT。主要关注变量在不同的时间点(基础(BSL)、SBT 结束(EoSBT)和拔管后一小时(OTE))收集人口统计学、临床数据、生理变量、电阻抗断层扫描(EIT)和肺部超声波(LUS)评估的肺通气情况以及膈肌超声波(DU)评估的呼吸强度。结果在不同的研究时间点,用 EIT 和 LUS 测量到的通气量减少,从 BSL 到 OTE,T-T 和 PSV 之间没有统计学差异[LUS:3 (1, 5.5) AU vs 2 (1, 3) AU; p = 0.088; EELI:-2516.41 (-5871.88, 1090.46) AU vs -1992.4 (-3458.76, -5.07) AU; p = 0.918]。与 EIT 相比,使用 LUS 时 BSL 和 OTE 之间的变化百分比更大(68.1% vs 4.9%,p ≤ 0.001)。结论T-T和PSV作为通气患者的不同SBT策略,在通气损失、EIT、LUS和DU测量的估计呼吸努力或潮气量方面并无差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparing lung aeration and respiratory effort using two different spontaneous breathing trial: T-piece vs pressure support ventilation

Objective

To assess the changes in lung aeration and respiratory effort generated by two different spontaneous breathing trial (SBT): T-piece (T-T) vs pressure support ventilation (PSV).

Design

Prospective, interventionist and randomized study.

Setting

Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of Hospital del Mar.

Participants

Forty-three ventilated patients for at least 24 h and considered eligible for an SBT were included in the study between October 2017 and March 2020.

Interventions

30-min SBT with T-piece (T-T group, 20 patients) or 8-cmH2O PSV and 5-cmH2O positive end expiratory pressure (PSV group, 23 patients).

Main variables of interest

Demographics, clinical data, physiological variables, lung aeration evaluated with electrical impedance tomography (EIT) and lung ultrasound (LUS), and respiratory effort using diaphragmatic ultrasonography (DU) were collected at different timepoints: basal (BSL), end of SBT (EoSBT) and one hour after extubation (OTE).

Results

There were a loss of aeration measured with EIT and LUS in the different study timepoints, without statistical differences from BSL to OTE, between T-T and PSV [LUS: 3 (1, 5.5) AU vs 2 (1, 3) AU; p = 0.088; EELI: −2516.41 (−5871.88, 1090.46) AU vs −1992.4 (−3458.76, −5.07) AU; p = 0.918]. Percentage of variation between BSL and OTE, was greater when LUS was used compared to EIT (68.1% vs 4.9%, p ≤ 0.001). Diaphragmatic excursion trend to decrease coinciding with a loss of aeration during extubation.

Conclusion

T-T and PSV as different SBT strategies in ventilated patients do not show differences in aeration loss, nor estimated respiratory effort or tidal volume measured by EIT, LUS and DU.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Medicina Intensiva
Medicina Intensiva CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
20.00%
发文量
146
审稿时长
33 days
期刊介绍: Medicina Intensiva is the journal of the Spanish Society of Intensive Care Medicine and Coronary Units (SEMICYUC) and of Pan American and Iberian Federation of Societies of Intensive and Critical Care Medicine. Medicina Intensiva has become the reference publication in Spanish in its field. The journal mainly publishes Original Articles, Reviews, Clinical Notes, Consensus Documents, Images, and other information relevant to the specialty. All works go through a rigorous selection process. The journal accepts submissions of articles in English and in Spanish languages. The journal follows the publication requirements of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
期刊最新文献
Perforación esofágica secundaria a una acalasia Aneurisma de aorta abdominal complicado con fístula aortocava Fragilidad, prevalencia en nuestras unidades de cuidados intensivos y características diferenciales de los pacientes frágiles Seguridad del paciente, ¿qué aportan la simulación clínica y la innovación docente? Análisis de los errores de medicación en Cuidados Intensivos Neonatales: una revisión sistemática
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1