Literature DB >> 15691392

Using ventilator graphics to identify patient-ventilator asynchrony.

Jon O Nilsestuen1, Kenneth D Hargett.   

Abstract

Patient-ventilator interaction can be described as the relationship between 2 respiratory pumps: (1) the patient's pulmonary system, which is controlled by the neuromuscular system and influenced by the mechanical characteristics of the lungs and thorax, and (2) the ventilator, which is controlled by the ventilator settings and the function of the flow valve. When the 2 pumps function in synchrony, every phase of the breath is perfectly matched. Anything that upsets the harmony between the 2 pumps results in asynchrony and causes patient discomfort and unnecessarily increases work of breathing. This article discusses asynchrony relative to the 4 phases of a breath and illustrates how asynchrony can be identified with the 3 standard ventilator waveforms: pressure, flow, and volume. The 4 phases of a breath are: (1) The trigger mechanism (ie, initiation of the inspiration), which is influenced by the trigger-sensitivity setting, patient effort, and valve responsiveness. (2) The inspiratory-flow phase. During both volume-controlled and pressure-controlled ventilation the patient's flow demand should be carefully evaluated, using the pressure and flow waveforms. (3) Breath termination (ie, the end of the inspiration). Ideally, the ventilator terminates inspiratory flow in synchrony with the patient's neural timing, but frequently the ventilator terminates inspiration either early or late, relative to the patient's neural timing. During volume-controlled ventilation we can adjust variables that affect inspiratory time (eg, peak flow, tidal volume). During pressure-controlled or pressure-support ventilation we can adjust variables that affect when the inspiration terminates (eg, inspiratory time, expiratory sensitivity). (4) Expiratory phase. Patients with obstructive lung disease are particularly prone to developing intrinsic positive end-expiratory pressure (auto-PEEP) and therefore have difficulty triggering the ventilator. Bedside evaluation for the presence of auto-PEEP should be routinely performed and corrective adjustments made when appropriate.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15691392

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Respir Care        ISSN: 0020-1324            Impact factor:   2.258


  22 in total

1.  Effects of relaxation of inspiratory muscles on ventilator pressure during pressure support.

Authors:  George Prinianakis; Maria Plataki; Eumorfia Kondili; Maria Klimathianaki; Katerina Vaporidi; Dimitris Georgopoulos
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2007-10-11       Impact factor: 17.440

2.  Not all types of asynchrony are created equal.

Authors:  Katherine C Clement; Mark J Heulitt
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2012-10-26       Impact factor: 17.440

3.  Neurally triggered breaths reduce trigger delay and improve ventilator response times in ventilated infants with bronchiolitis.

Authors:  Katherine C Clement; Tracy L Thurman; Shirley J Holt; Mark J Heulitt
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2011-09-23       Impact factor: 17.440

4.  Patient ventilator asynchrony in critically ill adults: frequency and types.

Authors:  Karen G Mellott; Mary Jo Grap; Cindy L Munro; Curtis N Sessler; Paul A Wetzel; Jon O Nilsestuen; Jessica M Ketchum
Journal:  Heart Lung       Date:  2014 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.210

Review 5.  Management of hypercapnia in critically ill mechanically ventilated patients-A narrative review of literature.

Authors:  Ravindranath Tiruvoipati; Sachin Gupta; David Pilcher; Michael Bailey
Journal:  J Intensive Care Soc       Date:  2020-03-30

Review 6.  Ventilator autotriggering : An underestimated phenomenon in the determination of brain death.

Authors:  G Schwarz; M Errath; P Arguelles Delgado; A Schöpfer; T Cavic
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 1.041

Review 7.  Bedside waveforms interpretation as a tool to identify patient-ventilator asynchronies.

Authors:  Dimitris Georgopoulos; George Prinianakis; Eumorfia Kondili
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2005-11-09       Impact factor: 17.440

Review 8.  Brazilian recommendations of mechanical ventilation 2013. Part I.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Bras Pneumol       Date:  2014 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.624

9.  Patient-ventilator dyssynchrony: clinical significance and implications for practice.

Authors:  Karen G Mellott; Mary Jo Grap; Cindy L Munro; Curtis N Sessler; Paul A Wetzel
Journal:  Crit Care Nurse       Date:  2009-09-01       Impact factor: 1.708

10.  Monitoring Patient/Ventilator Interactions: Manufacturer's Perspective.

Authors:  Gerard Evers; Carl Van Loey
Journal:  Open Respir Med J       Date:  2009-03-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.