TY - JOUR
T1 - Lung- and Diaphragm-Protective Ventilation by Titrating Inspiratory Support to Diaphragm Effort
T2 - A Randomized Clinical Trial
AU - de Vries, Heder J.
AU - Jonkman, Annemijn H.
AU - de Grooth, Harm J.
AU - Duitman, Jan Willem
AU - Girbes, Armand R.J.
AU - Ottenheijm, Coen A.C.
AU - Schultz, Marcus J.
AU - van de Ven, Peter M.
AU - Zhang, Yingrui
AU - de Man, Angelique M.E.
AU - Tuinman, Pieter R.
AU - Heunks, Leo M.A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.
PY - 2022/2/1
Y1 - 2022/2/1
N2 - OBJECTIVES: Lung- and diaphragm-protective ventilation is a novel concept that aims to limit the detrimental effects of mechanical ventilation on the diaphragm while remaining within limits of lung-protective ventilation. The premise is that low breathing effort under mechanical ventilation causes diaphragm atrophy, whereas excessive breathing effort induces diaphragm and lung injury. In a proof-of-concept study, we aimed to assess whether titration of inspiratory support based on diaphragm effort increases the time that patients have effort in a predefined “diaphragm-protective” range, without compromising lung-protective ventilation. DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial. SETTING: Mixed medical-surgical ICU in a tertiary academic hospital in the Netherlands. PATIENTS: Patients (n = 40) with respiratory failure ventilated in a partially-supported mode. INTERVENTIONS: In the intervention group, inspiratory support was titrated hourly to obtain transdiaphragmatic pressure swings in the predefined “diaphragm-protective” range (3–12 cm H2O). The control group received standard-of-care. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Transdiaphragmatic pressure, transpulmonary pressure, and tidal volume were monitored continuously for 24 hours in both groups. In the intervention group, more breaths were within “diaphragm-protective” range compared with the control group (median 81%; interquartile range [64–86%] vs 35% [16–60%], respectively; p < 0.001). Dynamic transpulmonary pressures (20.5 ± 7.1 vs 18.5 ± 7.0 cm H2O; p = 0.321) and tidal volumes (7.56 ± 1.47 vs 7.54 ± 1.22 mL/kg; p = 0.961) were not different in the intervention and control group, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Titration of inspiratory support based on patient breathing effort greatly increased the time that patients had diaphragm effort in the predefined “diaphragm-protective” range without compromising tidal volumes and transpulmonary pressures. This study provides a strong rationale for further studies powered on patient-centered outcomes.
AB - OBJECTIVES: Lung- and diaphragm-protective ventilation is a novel concept that aims to limit the detrimental effects of mechanical ventilation on the diaphragm while remaining within limits of lung-protective ventilation. The premise is that low breathing effort under mechanical ventilation causes diaphragm atrophy, whereas excessive breathing effort induces diaphragm and lung injury. In a proof-of-concept study, we aimed to assess whether titration of inspiratory support based on diaphragm effort increases the time that patients have effort in a predefined “diaphragm-protective” range, without compromising lung-protective ventilation. DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial. SETTING: Mixed medical-surgical ICU in a tertiary academic hospital in the Netherlands. PATIENTS: Patients (n = 40) with respiratory failure ventilated in a partially-supported mode. INTERVENTIONS: In the intervention group, inspiratory support was titrated hourly to obtain transdiaphragmatic pressure swings in the predefined “diaphragm-protective” range (3–12 cm H2O). The control group received standard-of-care. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Transdiaphragmatic pressure, transpulmonary pressure, and tidal volume were monitored continuously for 24 hours in both groups. In the intervention group, more breaths were within “diaphragm-protective” range compared with the control group (median 81%; interquartile range [64–86%] vs 35% [16–60%], respectively; p < 0.001). Dynamic transpulmonary pressures (20.5 ± 7.1 vs 18.5 ± 7.0 cm H2O; p = 0.321) and tidal volumes (7.56 ± 1.47 vs 7.54 ± 1.22 mL/kg; p = 0.961) were not different in the intervention and control group, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Titration of inspiratory support based on patient breathing effort greatly increased the time that patients had diaphragm effort in the predefined “diaphragm-protective” range without compromising tidal volumes and transpulmonary pressures. This study provides a strong rationale for further studies powered on patient-centered outcomes.
KW - Critical illness
KW - Diaphragm
KW - Esophageal pressure measurement
KW - Mechanical ventilation
KW - Work of breathing
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85124056751&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85124056751&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/CCM.0000000000005395
DO - 10.1097/CCM.0000000000005395
M3 - Article
C2 - 35100192
AN - SCOPUS:85124056751
SN - 0090-3493
VL - 50
SP - 192
EP - 203
JO - Critical care medicine
JF - Critical care medicine
IS - 2
ER -