Literature DB >> 22710796

A rational framework for selecting modes of ventilation.

Eduardo Mireles-Cabodevila1, Umur Hatipoğlu, Robert L Chatburn.   

Abstract

Mechanical ventilation is a life-saving intervention for respiratory failure and thus has become the cornerstone of the practice of critical care medicine. A mechanical ventilation mode describes the predetermined pattern of patient-ventilator interaction. In recent years there has been a dizzying proliferation of mechanical ventilation modes, driven by technological advances and market pressures, rather than clinical data. The comparison of these modes is hampered by the sheer number of combinations that need to be tested against one another, as well as the lack of a coherent, logical nomenclature that accurately describes a mode. In this paper we propose a logical nomenclature for mechanical ventilation modes, akin to biological taxonomy. Accordingly, the control variable, breath sequence, and targeting schemes for the primary and secondary breaths represent the order, family, genus, and species, respectively, for the described mode. To distinguish unique operational algorithms, a fifth level of distinction, termed variety, is utilized. We posit that such coherent ordering would facilitate comparison and understanding of modes. Next we suggest that the clinical goals of mechanical ventilation may be simplified into 3 broad categories: provision of safe gas exchange; provision of comfort; and promotion of liberation from mechanical ventilation. Safety is achieved via optimization of ventilation-perfusion matching and pressure-volume relationship of the lungs. Comfort is provided by fostering patient-ventilator synchrony. Liberation is promoted by optimization of the weaning experience. Then we follow a paradigm that matches the technological capacity of a particular mode to achieving a specific clinical goal. Finally, we provide the reader with a comparison of existing modes based on these principles. The status quo in mechanical ventilation mode nomenclature impedes communication and comparison of existing mechanical ventilation modes. The proposed model, utilizing a systematic nomenclature, provides a useful framework to address this unmet need.
© 2013 Daedalus Enterprises.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 22710796     DOI: 10.4187/respcare.01839

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


  5 in total

1.  Design and performance testing of a novel emergency ventilator for in-hospital use.

Authors:  Jacob M Knorr; Megan M Sheehan; Daniel C Santana; Sergey Samorezov; Ibrahim Sammour; Michael Deblock; Barry Kuban; Neal Chaisson; Robert L Chatburn
Journal:  Can J Respir Ther       Date:  2020-09-28

2.  Evaluation of fully automated ventilation: a randomized controlled study in post-cardiac surgery patients.

Authors:  François Lellouche; Pierre-Alexandre Bouchard; Serge Simard; Erwan L'Her; Marc Wysocki
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2013-01-22       Impact factor: 17.440

Review 3.  The cardiovascular effects of positive pressure ventilation.

Authors:  A Corp; C Thomas; M Adlam
Journal:  BJA Educ       Date:  2021-03-15

Review 4.  Newer nonconventional modes of mechanical ventilation.

Authors:  Preet Mohinder Singh; Anuradha Borle; Anjan Trikha
Journal:  J Emerg Trauma Shock       Date:  2014-07

Review 5.  Technology for noninvasive mechanical ventilation: looking into the black box.

Authors:  Ramon Farré; Daniel Navajas; Josep M Montserrat
Journal:  ERJ Open Res       Date:  2016-03-11
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.