R W Lawson1, J I Peters, D C Shelledy. 1. Department of Respiratory Care, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78229-3900, USA. LAWSON@uthscsa.edu
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB) on delivered volumes and pressures during mechanical ventilation, utilizing a lung model. DESIGN: Bench study. SETTING: Laboratory. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using varying-sized endotracheal tubes (ETTs), we ventilated a lung model at two levels of compliance utilizing different modes and parameters of ventilation. After establishing baseline measurements, the bronchoscope was inserted and measurements repeated. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: During controlled mechanical ventilation (CMV) with a preset high-pressure limit (HPL), tidal volumes (VTs) were reduced from 700 mL to 0 to 500 mL following insertion of the bronchoscope. Increasing the HPL to 120 cm H(2)O resulted in a VT of 40 to 680 mL. Changing from square to decelerating flow waveform resulted in no consistent difference in VT. Auto-positive end-expiratory pressure (auto-PEEP) of 0 to 41 cm H(2)O was present under most conditions. Higher rates and lower peak inspiratory flows were associated with higher levels of auto-PEEP. In the pressure-control (PC) mode, using a preset inspiratory pressure level (IP), VT was reduced from 700 mL to 40 to 280 mL following insertion of the bronchoscope. Maximum IP (100 cm H(2)O) increased VT to 260 to 700 mL. Auto-PEEP was less in the PC mode. CONCLUSIONS: Extreme care must be taken when bronchoscopy is performed on a patient receiving mechanical ventilation. Extremely low VT and significant auto-PEEP may develop unless flow, respiratory rate, mode, and ETT size are carefully selected. The PC mode delivered more volume than did the CMV mode. When performing FOB during mechanical ventilation, the inside diameter of the ETT should be > or = 2.0-mm larger than the outside diameter of the bronchoscope to maintain volume delivery and minimize the development of auto-PEEP.
STUDY OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB) on delivered volumes and pressures during mechanical ventilation, utilizing a lung model. DESIGN: Bench study. SETTING: Laboratory. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using varying-sized endotracheal tubes (ETTs), we ventilated a lung model at two levels of compliance utilizing different modes and parameters of ventilation. After establishing baseline measurements, the bronchoscope was inserted and measurements repeated. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: During controlled mechanical ventilation (CMV) with a preset high-pressure limit (HPL), tidal volumes (VTs) were reduced from 700 mL to 0 to 500 mL following insertion of the bronchoscope. Increasing the HPL to 120 cm H(2)O resulted in a VT of 40 to 680 mL. Changing from square to decelerating flow waveform resulted in no consistent difference in VT. Auto-positive end-expiratory pressure (auto-PEEP) of 0 to 41 cm H(2)O was present under most conditions. Higher rates and lower peak inspiratory flows were associated with higher levels of auto-PEEP. In the pressure-control (PC) mode, using a preset inspiratory pressure level (IP), VT was reduced from 700 mL to 40 to 280 mL following insertion of the bronchoscope. Maximum IP (100 cm H(2)O) increased VT to 260 to 700 mL. Auto-PEEP was less in the PC mode. CONCLUSIONS: Extreme care must be taken when bronchoscopy is performed on a patient receiving mechanical ventilation. Extremely low VT and significant auto-PEEP may develop unless flow, respiratory rate, mode, and ETT size are carefully selected. The PC mode delivered more volume than did the CMV mode. When performing FOB during mechanical ventilation, the inside diameter of the ETT should be > or = 2.0-mm larger than the outside diameter of the bronchoscope to maintain volume delivery and minimize the development of auto-PEEP.
Authors: Erik B Hysinger; Alister J Bates; Nara S Higano; Dan Benscoter; Robert J Fleck; Catherine K Hart; Gregory Burg; Alessandro De Alarcon; Paul S Kingma; Jason C Woods Journal: Chest Date: 2019-12-17 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Jörn Grensemann; Lars Eichler; Sophie Kähler; Dominik Jarczak; Marcel Simon; Hans O Pinnschmidt; Stefan Kluge Journal: Crit Care Date: 2018-03-23 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: José M Añón; María Soledad Arellano; Manuel Pérez-Márquez; Claudia Díaz-Alvariño; José A Márquez-Alonso; Jorge Rodríguez-Peláez; Kapil Nanwani-Nanwani; Ana Martín-Pellicer; Belén Civantos; Alba López-Fernández; Irene Seises; Jorge García-Nerín; Juan C Figueira; Henar Casero; Javier Vejo; Alexander Agrifoglio; Lucía Cachafeiro; Mariana Díaz-Almirón; Jesús Villar Journal: Trials Date: 2021-06-29 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Savino Spadaro; Iryna Kozhevnikova; Paolo Casolari; Paolo Ruggeri; Tiziana Bellini; Riccardo Ragazzi; Federica Barbieri; Elisabetta Marangoni; Gaetano Caramori; Carlo Alberto Volta Journal: BMJ Open Respir Res Date: 2017-09-04
Authors: Or Kalchiem-Dekel; Saamia Hossain; Cosmin Gauran; Jason A Beattie; Bryan C Husta; Robert P Lee; Mohit Chawla Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2021-08 Impact factor: 2.895