| Literature DB >> 30916116 |
Jose Roberto Fioretto1, Rafaelle Batistella Pires2, Susiane Oliveira Klefens1, Cilmery Suemi Kurokawa1, Mario Ferreira Carpi1, Rossano César Bonatto1, Marcos Aurélio Moraes1, Carlos Fernando Ronchi1,3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects that prone and supine positioning during high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) have on oxygenation and lung inflammation, histological injury, and oxidative stress in a rabbit model of acute lung injury (ALI).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30916116 PMCID: PMC6715165 DOI: 10.1590/1806-3713/e20180067
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Bras Pneumol ISSN: 1806-3713 Impact factor: 2.624
Figure 1Experimental protocol design. ALI: acute lung injury; and HFOV: high-frequency oscillatory ventilation. *Arterial blood gas analysis.
Oxygenation indices, pulmonary mechanics, and hemodynamic data, at baseline and after induction of lung injury.a
| Parameter | Group | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Supine position | Prone position | |||
| Baseline | After lung injury | Baseline | After lung injury | |
| PaO2/FiO2 (mmHg) | 447.6 (364.18-492.75) | 72.1 (52.08-86.18)* | 481.7 (428.37-493.88) | 64.5 (48.25-81.88)* |
| OIb (cmH2O/mmHg) | 1.5 (1.41-2.06) | 13.7 (11.21-21.15)* | 1.44 (1.38-1.74) | 14.7 (11.8-21.26)* |
| Crs (mL/cmH2O) | 3.3 (3.1-3.68) | 1.2 (1.0-1.3)* | 3.8 (2.83-4.4) | 1.2 (1.0-1.38)* |
| Mean Paw (cmH2O) | 7.0 (6.9-7.1) | 10.0 (9.5-11.0)* | 7.04 ± 0.5 | 9.75 ± 0.63* |
OI: oxygenation index; Crs: respiratory system compliance; and Paw: airway pressure. aResults expressed as mean ± SD for data with normal distribution and as median (range) for data with non-normal distribution. bCalculated as [FiO2 × mean Paw] / PaO2 × 100. *p < 0.05 vs. after lung injury; Kruskal-Wallis one-way ANOVA for data with normal distribution and Mann-Whitney rank-sum test for data with non-normal distribution.
Figure 2PaO2 and oxygenation indexa over time (A and B, respectively) in the experimental groups.b PP: prone position group (filled ovals); SP: supine position group (open ovals); T0: time zero; T30: 30 min; T60: 60 min; T90: 90 min; T120: 120 min; and T150: 150 min. aCalculated as [FiO2 × mean Paw] / PaO2 × 100. bValues expressed as mean ± SD. *p ≤ 0.05 vs. baseline.
Figure 3TNF-α levels in BAL fluid (BALF) and lung tissue (A and B, respectively),a the latter comparing ventral and dorsal lung tissue samples, in the prone position (PP) and supine position (SP) groups. aValues expressed as mean ± SD. *p ≤ 0.05 vs. PP group. †p > 0.05 vs. dorsal lung tissue in the PP group. ‡p ≤ 0.05 vs. dorsal lung tissue in the SP group.
Figure 4Histological lung injury scores in the supine position (SP) and prone position (PP) groups, including comparisons between scores for ventral and dorsal lung tissue samples.a,‡ aValues expressed as median (range). *p < 0.05 vs. ventral lung tissue (Mann-Whitney rank-sum test). †p < 0.05 vs. PP group (Mann-Whitney rank-sum test). ‡p > 0.05 for interactions among lung regions and positioning (Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA, followed by Dunn’s test).