OBJECTIVES: It is not known if proportional assist ventilation with load-adjustable gain factors (PAV+) may be used as a mode of support in critically ill patients. The aim of this study was to examine the effectiveness of sustained use of PAV+ in critically ill patients and compare it with pressure support ventilation (PS). DESIGN AND SETTING: Randomized study in the intensive care unit of a university hospital. METHODS: A total of 208 critically ill patients mechanically ventilated on controlled modes for at least 36 h and meeting certain criteria were randomized to receive either PS (n = 100) or PAV+ (n = 108). Specific written algorithms were used to adjust the ventilator settings in each mode. PAV+ or PS was continued for 48 h unless the patients met pre-defined criteria either for switching to controlled modes (failure criteria) or for breathing without ventilator assistance. RESULTS:Failure rate was significantly lower in PAV+ than that in PS (11.1 vs. 22.0%, P = 0.040, OR 0.443, 95% CI 0.206-0.952). The proportion of patients exhibiting major patient-ventilator dyssynchronies at least during one occasion and after adjusting the initial ventilator settings, was significantly lower in PAV+ than in PS (5.6 vs. 29.0%, P < 0.001, OR 0.1, 95% CI 0.06-0.4). The proportion of patients meeting criteria for unassisted breathing did not differ between modes. CONCLUSIONS:PAV+ may be used as a useful mode of support in critically ill patients. Compared to PS, PAV+ increases the probability of remaining on spontaneous breathing, while it considerably reduces the incidence of patient-ventilator asynchronies.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: It is not known if proportional assist ventilation with load-adjustable gain factors (PAV+) may be used as a mode of support in critically ill patients. The aim of this study was to examine the effectiveness of sustained use of PAV+ in critically ill patients and compare it with pressure support ventilation (PS). DESIGN AND SETTING: Randomized study in the intensive care unit of a university hospital. METHODS: A total of 208 critically ill patients mechanically ventilated on controlled modes for at least 36 h and meeting certain criteria were randomized to receive either PS (n = 100) or PAV+ (n = 108). Specific written algorithms were used to adjust the ventilator settings in each mode. PAV+ or PS was continued for 48 h unless the patients met pre-defined criteria either for switching to controlled modes (failure criteria) or for breathing without ventilator assistance. RESULTS: Failure rate was significantly lower in PAV+ than that in PS (11.1 vs. 22.0%, P = 0.040, OR 0.443, 95% CI 0.206-0.952). The proportion of patients exhibiting major patient-ventilator dyssynchronies at least during one occasion and after adjusting the initial ventilator settings, was significantly lower in PAV+ than in PS (5.6 vs. 29.0%, P < 0.001, OR 0.1, 95% CI 0.06-0.4). The proportion of patients meeting criteria for unassisted breathing did not differ between modes. CONCLUSIONS:PAV+ may be used as a useful mode of support in critically ill patients. Compared to PS, PAV+ increases the probability of remaining on spontaneous breathing, while it considerably reduces the incidence of patient-ventilator asynchronies.
Authors: Pier Paolo Terragni; Giulio Rosboch; Andrea Tealdi; Eleonora Corno; Eleonora Menaldo; Ottavio Davini; Giovanni Gandini; Peter Herrmann; Luciana Mascia; Michel Quintel; Arthur S Slutsky; Luciano Gattinoni; V Marco Ranieri Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2006-10-12 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: R Phillip Dellinger; Mitchell M Levy; Jean M Carlet; Julian Bion; Margaret M Parker; Roman Jaeschke; Konrad Reinhart; Derek C Angus; Christian Brun-Buisson; Richard Beale; Thierry Calandra; Jean-Francois Dhainaut; Herwig Gerlach; Maurene Harvey; John J Marini; John Marshall; Marco Ranieri; Graham Ramsay; Jonathan Sevransky; B Taylor Thompson; Sean Townsend; Jeffrey S Vender; Janice L Zimmerman; Jean-Louis Vincent Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: V M Ranieri; R Giuliani; L Mascia; S Grasso; V Petruzzelli; N Puntillo; G Perchiazzi; T Fiore; A Brienza Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 1996-07
Authors: C Alexopoulou; E Kondili; E Vakouti; M Klimathianaki; G Prinianakis; D Georgopoulos Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2007-04-26 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: R Costa; G Spinazzola; F Cipriani; G Ferrone; O Festa; A Arcangeli; M Antonelli; R Proietti; G Conti Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2011-07-01 Impact factor: 17.440