Effects on Lung Gas Volume, Respiratory Mechanics and Gas Exchange of a Closed-Circuit Suctioning System during Volume- and Pressure-Controlled Ventilation in ARDS Patients

Mechanically ventilated patients periodically require endotracheal suctioning. There are conflicting data regarding the loss of lung gas volume caused by the application of a negative pressure by closed-circuit suctioning. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of suctioning performed by...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of clinical medicine 2021-11, Vol.10 (23), p.5657
Main Authors: Chiumello, Davide, Bolgiaghi, Luca, Formenti, Paolo, Pozzi, Tommaso, Lucenteforte, Manuela, Coppola, Silvia
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Catheters
Clinical medicine
Mechanics
Patients
Respiratory system
Suctioning
Tomography
Variance analysis
Ventilators
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Mechanically ventilated patients periodically require endotracheal suctioning. There are conflicting data regarding the loss of lung gas volume caused by the application of a negative pressure by closed-circuit suctioning. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of suctioning performed by a closed-circuit system in ARDS patients during volume- or pressure-controlled ventilation. In this prospective crossover-design study, 18 ARDS patients were ventilated under volume and pressure control applied in random order. Gas exchange, respiratory mechanics and EIT-derived end-expiratory lung volume (EELV) before the suctioning manoeuvre and after 5, 15 and 30 min were recorded. The tidal volume and respiratory rate were similar in both ventilation modes; in volume control, the EELV decreased by 31 ± 23 mL, 5 min after the suctioning, but it remained similar after 15 and 30 min; the oxygenation, PaCO2 and respiratory system elastance did not change. In the pressure control, 5 min after suctioning, EELV decreased by 35 (26–46) mL, the PaO2/FiO2 did not change, while PaCO2 increased by 5 and 30 min after suctioning (45 (40–51) vs. 48 (43–52) and 47 (42–54) mmHg, respectively). Our results suggest minimal clinical advantages when a closed system is used in volume-controlled compared to pressure-controlled ventilation.
ISSN:2077-0383
2077-0383
DOI:10.3390/jcm10235657