OBJECTIVES: Mechanical ventilation of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome should balance lung and diaphragm protective principles, which may be difficult to achieve in routine clinical practice. Through a Phase I clinical trial, we sought to determine whether a computerized decision support-based protocol (real-time effort-driven ventilator management) is feasible to implement, results in improved acceptance for lung and diaphragm protective ventilation, and improves clinical outcomes over historical controls. DESIGN: Interventional nonblinded pilot study. SETTING: PICU. PATIENTS: Mechanically ventilated children with acute respiratory distress syndrome. INTERVENTIONS: A computerized decision support tool was tested which prioritized lung-protective management of peak inspiratory pressure-positive end-expiratory pressure, positive end-expiratory pressure/FIO2, and ventilatory rate. Esophageal manometry was used to maintain patient effort in a physiologic range. Protocol acceptance was reported, and enrolled patients were matched 4:1 with respect to age, initial oxygenation index, and percentage of immune compromise to historical control patients for outcome analysis. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were included. Acceptance of protocol recommendations was over 75%. One-hundred twenty-eight matched historical controls were used for analysis. Compared with historical controls, patients treated with real-time effort-driven ventilator management received lower peak inspiratory pressure-positive end-expiratory pressure and tidal volume, and higher positive end-expiratory pressure when FIO2 was greater than 0.60. Real-time effort-driven ventilator management was associated with 6 more ventilator-free days, shorter duration until the first spontaneous breathing trial and 3 fewer days on mechanical ventilation among survivors (all p ≤ 0.05) in comparison with historical controls, while maintaining no difference in the rate of reintubation. CONCLUSIONS: A computerized decision support-based protocol prioritizing lung-protective ventilation balanced with reduction of controlled ventilation to maintain physiologic levels of patient effort can be implemented and may be associated with shorter duration of ventilation.
OBJECTIVES: Mechanical ventilation of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome should balance lung and diaphragm protective principles, which may be difficult to achieve in routine clinical practice. Through a Phase I clinical trial, we sought to determine whether a computerized decision support-based protocol (real-time effort-driven ventilator management) is feasible to implement, results in improved acceptance for lung and diaphragm protective ventilation, and improves clinical outcomes over historical controls. DESIGN: Interventional nonblinded pilot study. SETTING: PICU. PATIENTS: Mechanically ventilated children with acute respiratory distress syndrome. INTERVENTIONS: A computerized decision support tool was tested which prioritized lung-protective management of peak inspiratory pressure-positive end-expiratory pressure, positive end-expiratory pressure/FIO2, and ventilatory rate. Esophageal manometry was used to maintain patient effort in a physiologic range. Protocol acceptance was reported, and enrolled patients were matched 4:1 with respect to age, initial oxygenation index, and percentage of immune compromise to historical control patients for outcome analysis. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were included. Acceptance of protocol recommendations was over 75%. One-hundred twenty-eight matched historical controls were used for analysis. Compared with historical controls, patients treated with real-time effort-driven ventilator management received lower peak inspiratory pressure-positive end-expiratory pressure and tidal volume, and higher positive end-expiratory pressure when FIO2 was greater than 0.60. Real-time effort-driven ventilator management was associated with 6 more ventilator-free days, shorter duration until the first spontaneous breathing trial and 3 fewer days on mechanical ventilation among survivors (all p ≤ 0.05) in comparison with historical controls, while maintaining no difference in the rate of reintubation. CONCLUSIONS: A computerized decision support-based protocol prioritizing lung-protective ventilation balanced with reduction of controlled ventilation to maintain physiologic levels of patient effort can be implemented and may be associated with shorter duration of ventilation.
Authors: Justin C Hotz; Cary T Sodetani; Jeffrey Van Steenbergen; Robinder G Khemani; Timothy W Deakers; Christopher J Newth Journal: Respir Care Date: 2017-10-31 Impact factor: 2.258
Authors: Giacomo Bellani; John G Laffey; Tài Pham; Eddy Fan; Laurent Brochard; Andres Esteban; Luciano Gattinoni; Frank van Haren; Anders Larsson; Daniel F McAuley; Marco Ranieri; Gordon Rubenfeld; B Taylor Thompson; Hermann Wrigge; Arthur S Slutsky; Antonio Pesenti Journal: JAMA Date: 2016-02-23 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Matthias Briel; Maureen Meade; Alain Mercat; Roy G Brower; Daniel Talmor; Stephen D Walter; Arthur S Slutsky; Eleanor Pullenayegum; Qi Zhou; Deborah Cook; Laurent Brochard; Jean-Christophe M Richard; Francois Lamontagne; Neera Bhatnagar; Thomas E Stewart; Gordon Guyatt Journal: JAMA Date: 2010-03-03 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Ewan C Goligher; Eddy Fan; Margaret S Herridge; Alistair Murray; Stefannie Vorona; Debbie Brace; Nuttapol Rittayamai; Ashley Lanys; George Tomlinson; Jeffrey M Singh; Steffen-Sebastian Bolz; Gordon D Rubenfeld; Brian P Kavanagh; Laurent J Brochard; Niall D Ferguson Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2015-11-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Daniel Talmor; Todd Sarge; Atul Malhotra; Carl R O'Donnell; Ray Ritz; Alan Lisbon; Victor Novack; Stephen H Loring Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-11-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Sriram Ramgopal; L Nelson Sanchez-Pinto; Christopher M Horvat; Michael S Carroll; Yuan Luo; Todd A Florin Journal: Pediatr Res Date: 2022-07-29 Impact factor: 3.953