PURPOSE: To investigate ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI), several experimental models were designed including different mammalian species and ventilator settings, leading to a large variability in the observed time-course and injury severity. We hypothesized that the time-course of VILI may be fully explained from a single perspective when considering the insult actually applied, i.e. lung stress and strain. METHODS: Studies in which healthy animals were aggressively ventilated until preterminal VILI were selected via a Medline search. Data on morphometry, ventilator settings, respiratory function and duration of ventilation were derived. For each animal group, lung stress (transpulmonary pressure) and strain (end-inspiratory lung inflation/lung resting volume ratio) were estimated. RESULTS: From the Medline search 20 studies including five mammalian species (sheep, pigs, rabbits, rats, mice) were selected. Time to achieve preterminal VILI varied widely (18-2,784 min), did not correlate with either tidal volume (expressed in relation to body weight) or airway pressure applied, but was weakly associated with lung stress (r (2) = 0.25, p = 0.008). In contrast, the duration of mechanical ventilation was closely correlated with both lung strain (r (2) = 0.85, p < 0.0001) and lung strain weighted for the actual time of application during each breath (r (2) = 0.83, p < 0.0001), according to exponential decay functions. When it was normalized for the lung strain applied, larger species showed a greater resistance to VILI than smaller species (medians, 25th-75th percentiles: 690, 460-2,001 min vs. 16, 4-59 min, respectively; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Lung strain may play a critical role as a unifying rule describing the development of VILI among mammals with healthy lungs.
PURPOSE: To investigate ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI), several experimental models were designed including different mammalian species and ventilator settings, leading to a large variability in the observed time-course and injury severity. We hypothesized that the time-course of VILI may be fully explained from a single perspective when considering the insult actually applied, i.e. lung stress and strain. METHODS: Studies in which healthy animals were aggressively ventilated until preterminal VILI were selected via a Medline search. Data on morphometry, ventilator settings, respiratory function and duration of ventilation were derived. For each animal group, lung stress (transpulmonary pressure) and strain (end-inspiratory lung inflation/lung resting volume ratio) were estimated. RESULTS: From the Medline search 20 studies including five mammalian species (sheep, pigs, rabbits, rats, mice) were selected. Time to achieve preterminal VILI varied widely (18-2,784 min), did not correlate with either tidal volume (expressed in relation to body weight) or airway pressure applied, but was weakly associated with lung stress (r (2) = 0.25, p = 0.008). In contrast, the duration of mechanical ventilation was closely correlated with both lung strain (r (2) = 0.85, p < 0.0001) and lung strain weighted for the actual time of application during each breath (r (2) = 0.83, p < 0.0001), according to exponential decay functions. When it was normalized for the lung strain applied, larger species showed a greater resistance to VILI than smaller species (medians, 25th-75th percentiles: 690, 460-2,001 min vs. 16, 4-59 min, respectively; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Lung strain may play a critical role as a unifying rule describing the development of VILI among mammals with healthy lungs.
Authors: Joseph D DiRocco; Lucio A Pavone; David E Carney; Charles J Lutz; Louis A Gatto; Steve K Landas; Gary F Nieman Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2005-12-02 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Pietro Caironi; Fumito Ichinose; Rong Liu; Rosemary C Jones; Kenneth D Bloch; Warren M Zapol Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2005-05-13 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Scott E Sinclair; David A Kregenow; Wayne J E Lamm; Ian R Starr; Emil Y Chi; Michael P Hlastala Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2002-08-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Michael R Wilson; Michael E Goddard; Kieran P O'Dea; Sharmila Choudhury; Masao Takata Journal: Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol Date: 2007-04-13 Impact factor: 5.464
Authors: Margit V Szabari; Kazue Takahashi; Yan Feng; Joseph J Locascio; Wei Chao; Edward A Carter; Marcos F Vidal Melo; Guido Musch Journal: Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol Date: 2019-02 Impact factor: 6.914
Authors: Joseph A Herbert; Michael S Valentine; Nivi Saravanan; Matthew B Schneck; Ramana Pidaparti; Alpha A Fowler; Angela M Reynolds; Rebecca L Heise Journal: Exp Gerontol Date: 2016-05-14 Impact factor: 4.032
Authors: Nadir Yehya; Yi Xin; Yousi Oquendo; Maurizio Cereda; Rahim R Rizi; Susan S Margulies Journal: Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol Date: 2014-12-30 Impact factor: 5.464
Authors: L Gattinoni; T Tonetti; M Cressoni; P Cadringher; P Herrmann; O Moerer; A Protti; M Gotti; C Chiurazzi; E Carlesso; D Chiumello; M Quintel Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2016-09-12 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Nurit Davidovich; Brian C DiPaolo; Gladys G Lawrence; Peter Chhour; Nadir Yehya; Susan S Margulies Journal: Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 6.914
Authors: Nazareth N Rocha; Cynthia S Samary; Mariana A Antunes; Milena V Oliveira; Matheus R Hemerly; Patrine S Santos; Vera L Capelozzi; Fernanda F Cruz; John J Marini; Pedro L Silva; Paolo Pelosi; Patricia R M Rocco Journal: Respir Res Date: 2021-07-30