Literature DB >> 32024538

Which component of mechanical power is most important in causing VILI?

John J Marini1, Patricia R M Rocco2.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Keywords:  ARDS; Inflation energy; Ventilating power; Ventilator-induced lung injury

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32024538      PMCID: PMC7003372          DOI: 10.1186/s13054-020-2747-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care        ISSN: 1364-8535            Impact factor:   9.097


× No keyword cloud information.

Background: energy, power, and VILI

Repeated applications of tidal energy inflict lung damage (VILI) when stress and strain exceed the limits of tissue tolerance. Inflation work and energy are the products of pressure and volume, which are loosely associated with stress and strain, respectively. Three major pressure components contribute to tidal inflation energy: flow resistive pressure, tidal elastic (driving) pressure, and the static elastic pressure baseline set by PEEP [1, 2]. Although total inflation power, i.e., the energy per cycle multiplied by ventilating frequency, has been causally linked to VILI risk [3], not all combinations of the three pressure components of energy and frequency that sum to the same total power value are equally hazardous. For injury to occur, a second requirement (apart from the raw power total) is a precondition; enough strain per cycle must be imposed to sufficiently distort lung parenchyma or disrupt vulnerable elements of the extracellular matrix that comprise the interdependent supporting framework for the alveolar network. The strain actually experienced at the tissue level depends on local force-amplifying influences such as geometrical stress focusing and rate of parenchymal expansion [4]. Duration of exposure (which determines the cumulative number of high stress cycles) is clearly of importance once the injuring strain threshold has been breached. Finally, whether or not a given pattern of ventilation injures also depends on lung capacity and innate vulnerability of lung tissues to the applied mechanical stress. Thus, a healthy lung can withstand power loads much greater than do the relatively fragile but functional alveoli that make up the “baby lung” of ARDS [5].

Sub-components and thresholds of tidal energy

Regarding the monitored variables of ventilation that relate to total inflation pressure, active debate has developed as to whether the element with most influence is end-inspiratory static (plateau) pressure or its difference from PEEP, known as the driving pressure (ΔP) [6-8]. PEEP bears a U-shaped relationship to VILI risk, with low levels tending to reduce atelectasis and distribute stress [9, 10]. On the other hand, high PEEP sets an elevated platform from which widespread tidal overstretching of the parenchyma as well as hemodynamic compromise become increasingly likely [10]. Finally, neither PEEP, plateau pressure, nor their difference (ΔP) reflect the dynamics and dissipated energy of the tidal cycle. While energy clearly must be expended to produce damaging strain, uncertainty exists regarding which component of the applied energy per inflation cycle deserves closest attention. As implied by the earlier discussion, the “energy envelope” of tidal inflation encloses a total pressure-volume area defined by the combination of the flow-resistive, tidal elastic and PEEP-associated sectors that comprise it (Fig. 1a). Although flow-resistive energy largely dissipates in pushing gas past the endotracheal tube and through conducting airways, rapid movements of parenchymal tissues induce greater strains than slower ones—both during inflation and deflation [4, 11, 12].
Fig. 1

a Left Panel: Elastic and flow resistive components of the total energy per tidal cycle during passive constant flow. b Right Panel: An arbitrarily assumed threshold for damaging pressure divides total tidal energy into subcomponent blocks below and above the boundary that separates potentially non-injurious (blocks G, D, and E) from injurious contributors (blocks F, A, B, and C), respectively. Simple algebraic estimates for each can be developed from clinical data using pre-specified parameters of mechanics or empirically observed measurements at the bedside. Example: total power = f × [A + B + C + D + E + F + G] = V’E × (RV’ + VT/2c + PEEP) or alternatively: (V’E/2) × (2 Ppeak − Pplat + PEEP). Total Dynamic Excessive Power = f × [A + B + C] = V’E × {1 + [(PEEP − PT) × c]/VT} × ½ [(VT/c) + PEEP + PT] or alternatively: V’E × [(Pplat − PT)/(Pplat − PEEP)] × [(Pplat + PT)/2)]. Abbreviations: R = Resistance; c = Compliance

a Left Panel: Elastic and flow resistive components of the total energy per tidal cycle during passive constant flow. b Right Panel: An arbitrarily assumed threshold for damaging pressure divides total tidal energy into subcomponent blocks below and above the boundary that separates potentially non-injurious (blocks G, D, and E) from injurious contributors (blocks F, A, B, and C), respectively. Simple algebraic estimates for each can be developed from clinical data using pre-specified parameters of mechanics or empirically observed measurements at the bedside. Example: total power = f × [A + B + C + D + E + F + G] = V’E × (RV’ + VT/2c + PEEP) or alternatively: (V’E/2) × (2 Ppeak − Pplat + PEEP). Total Dynamic Excessive Power = f × [A + B + C] = V’E × {1 + [(PEEP − PT) × c]/VT} × ½ [(VT/c) + PEEP + PT] or alternatively: V’E × [(Pplat − PT)/(Pplat − PEEP)] × [(Pplat + PT)/2)]. Abbreviations: R = Resistance; c = Compliance The influence of PEEP-related inflation energy often has been discounted as well, using the reasoning that the pressure baseline is eventually recovered at the end of the deflation phase [8, 13]. Whatever the perceived wisdom of that argument, PEEP undeniably elevates volume and strain over the resting values of their fully relaxed states. In so doing, raising PEEP requires that each inflation volume increment is achieved at higher absolute pressure and with greater energy input. The driving pressure (tidal elastic) component of inflation energy parallels the amplitude of tidal volume and only quantifies incremental work due to raising elastic pressure above baseline PEEP. It must be recognized that VILI may manifest in various ways: e.g., as inflammation, cellular disruption, or focal hyperinflation, with different tidal pressure components contributing unequally to each [9, 10]. For an individual lung, thresholds for stress, strain, energy, and power must exist, below which their applications pose little threat of whichever kind (Fig. 1a). Such thresholds are conditioned by the underlying integrity of the tissue elements, by the stage and extent of injury, and by the topographical position of the individual lung unit under consideration (local stress environment). In concept, such thresholds migrate to lower or higher levels as disease progresses or recedes. While input of cumulative total energy and total power have been experimentally demonstrated to be linked to VILI [3, 14, 15], exactly which delivered component or subcomponent of power best correlates with damage has not been clearly identified. For example, it might be argued that only energy that relates to driving pressure or total elastic pressure (the product of volume and absolute alveolar pressure, ΔP + PEEP) would best track stretch and VILI risk. Alternatively, the total kinetic energy applied in excess of PEEP (the product of volume and the sum of ΔP plus flow resistive pressure) might hold equal interest regarding inflammatory changes. Furthermore, if we assume the existence of a pressure-strain threshold for damage and take it into consideration, perhaps only energy applied in excess of that level would be VILI-relevant. A breakdown of total tidal energy by threshold pressure gives rise to clinically measurable “blocks” of energy during passive inflation with constant flow (Fig. 1b). As the search to define the safety limits of power application proceeds, one or more of these energy sub-blocks hold potential to sharpen the precision of setting an upper target for lung-protecting power.

Estimating components of inflation energy

In theory, with resistance and compliance known and a threshold assumed, relatively simple algebraic formulae could estimate energy components (“blocks”) of research or clinical interest that are defined by pressure-volume areas during passive inflation with constant flow. These formulae use reasonable simplifying assumptions and a geometric approach to analysis (Fig. 1b). The theoretical impact of a proposed change in ventilation on the components of this energy/power complex could then be numerically estimated before they are actually made. Using similar principles when only already measured pressures, flow, volume, and frequency and are at hand, a comparable rationale and method produce condensed formulae that estimate these same energy components, so as to characterize the pattern already in use or to serially track the evolution and resolution of the ergo-trauma determinants of greatest interest (Fig. 1b).
  15 in total

1.  Is mechanical power the final word on ventilator-induced lung injury?-no.

Authors:  Robert Huhle; Ary Serpa Neto; Marcus J Schultz; Marcelo Gama de Abreu
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2018-10

2.  Positive End-expiratory Pressure and Mechanical Power.

Authors:  Francesca Collino; Francesca Rapetti; Francesco Vasques; Giorgia Maiolo; Tommaso Tonetti; Federica Romitti; Julia Niewenhuys; Tim Behnemann; Luigi Camporota; Günter Hahn; Verena Reupke; Karin Holke; Peter Herrmann; Eleonora Duscio; Francesco Cipulli; Onnen Moerer; John J Marini; Michael Quintel; Luciano Gattinoni
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 7.892

Review 3.  The "baby lung" became an adult.

Authors:  Luciano Gattinoni; John J Marini; Antonio Pesenti; Michael Quintel; Jordi Mancebo; Laurent Brochard
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2016-01-18       Impact factor: 17.440

4.  Ventilator-related causes of lung injury: the mechanical power.

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

5.  Biologic Impact of Mechanical Power at High and Low Tidal Volumes in Experimental Mild Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

Authors:  Raquel S Santos; Ligia de A Maia; Milena V Oliveira; Cíntia L Santos; Lillian Moraes; Eliete F Pinto; Cynthia Dos S Samary; Joana A Machado; Anna Carolinna Carvalho; Marcos Vinícius de S Fernandes; Vanessa Martins; Vera L Capelozzi; Marcelo M Morales; Thea Koch; Marcelo Gama de Abreu; Paolo Pelosi; Pedro L Silva; Patricia R M Rocco
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 7.892

6.  The role of high airway pressure and dynamic strain on ventilator-induced lung injury in a heterogeneous acute lung injury model.

Authors:  Sumeet V Jain; Michaela Kollisch-Singule; Joshua Satalin; Quinn Searles; Luke Dombert; Osama Abdel-Razek; Natesh Yepuri; Antony Leonard; Angelika Gruessner; Penny Andrews; Fabeha Fazal; Qinghe Meng; Guirong Wang; Louis A Gatto; Nader M Habashi; Gary F Nieman
Journal:  Intensive Care Med Exp       Date:  2017-05-12

Review 7.  Power to mechanical power to minimize ventilator-induced lung injury?

Authors:  Pedro Leme Silva; Lorenzo Ball; Patricia R M Rocco; Paolo Pelosi
Journal:  Intensive Care Med Exp       Date:  2019-07-25

8.  Flow-Controlled Ventilation Attenuates Lung Injury in a Porcine Model of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Preclinical Randomized Controlled Study.

Authors:  Johannes Schmidt; Christin Wenzel; Sashko Spassov; Silke Borgmann; Ziwei Lin; Jakob Wollborn; Jonas Weber; Jörg Haberstroh; Stephan Meckel; Sebastian Eiden; Steffen Wirth; Stefan Schumann
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 7.598

Review 9.  Lung parenchymal mechanics in health and disease.

Authors:  Débora S Faffe; Walter A Zin
Journal:  Physiol Rev       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 37.312

Review 10.  Static and Dynamic Contributors to Ventilator-induced Lung Injury in Clinical Practice. Pressure, Energy, and Power.

Authors:  John J Marini; Patricia R M Rocco; Luciano Gattinoni
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2020-04-01       Impact factor: 21.405

View more
  7 in total

1.  Intracycle power distribution in a heterogeneous multi-compartmental mathematical model: possible links to strain and VILI.

Authors:  Philip S Crooke; Luciano Gattinoni; Michael Michalik; John J Marini
Journal:  Intensive Care Med Exp       Date:  2022-06-01

2.  What have we learned from animal models of ventilator-induced lung injury?

Authors:  Patricia Rieken Macedo Rocco; John J Marini
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2020-06-04       Impact factor: 17.440

3.  Mechanical Power during Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Initiation: A Pilot-Study.

Authors:  Mirko Belliato; Francesco Epis; Luca Cremascoli; Fiorenza Ferrari; Maria Giovanna Quattrone; Christoph Fisser; Maximilian Valentin Malfertheiner; Fabio Silvio Taccone; Matteo Di Nardo; Lars Mikael Broman; Roberto Lorusso
Journal:  Membranes (Basel)       Date:  2021-01-02

4.  Intra-cycle power: is the flow profile a neglected component of lung protection?

Authors:  John J Marini; Philip S Crooke; Luciano Gattinoni
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2021-04-02       Impact factor: 17.440

5.  Influence of mechanical power and its components on mechanical ventilation in SARS-CoV-2.

Authors:  Claudio Luciano Franck; Gustavo Maysonnave Franck
Journal:  Rev Bras Ter Intensiva       Date:  2022 Apr-Jun

6.  Effects of different fluid management on lung and kidney during pressure-controlled and pressure-support ventilation in experimental acute lung injury.

Authors:  Eduardo Butturini de Carvalho; Ana Carolina Fernandes Fonseca; Raquel Ferreira Magalhães; Eliete Ferreira Pinto; Cynthia Dos Santos Samary; Mariana Alves Antunes; Camila Machado Baldavira; Lizandre Keren Ramos da Silveira; Walcy Rosolia Teodoro; Marcelo Gama de Abreu; Vera Luiza Capelozzi; Nathane Santanna Felix; Paolo Pelosi; Patrícia Rieken Macêdo Rocco; Pedro Leme Silva
Journal:  Physiol Rep       Date:  2022-09

7.  On the Transition from Control Modes to Spontaneous Modes during ECMO.

Authors:  Krista Stephens; Nathan Mitchell; Sean Overton; Joseph E Tonna
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2021-03-02       Impact factor: 4.241

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.