| Literature DB >> 35036142 |
Rainer Thomas1, Tanghua Liu1, Arno Schad2, Robert Ruemmler1, Jens Kamuf1, René Rissel1, Thomas Ott1, Matthias David1, Erik K Hartmann1, Alexander Ziebart1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Shedding of the endothelial glycocalyx can be observed regularly during sepsis. Moreover, sepsis may be associated with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), which requires lung protective ventilation with the two cornerstones of application of low tidal volume and positive end-expiratory pressure. This study investigated the effect of a lung protective ventilation on the integrity of the endothelial glycocalyx in comparison to a high tidal volume ventilation mode in a porcine model of sepsis-induced ARDS.Entities:
Keywords: ARDS; Acute respiratory distress syndrome; Glycocalyx; High tidal volume ventilation; Hyaluronic acid; Lung protective ventilation; Pig; Sepsis
Year: 2022 PMID: 35036142 PMCID: PMC8742546 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.12649
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ ISSN: 2167-8359 Impact factor: 2.984
Intervention scheme.
| LTV | HTV | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| FiO2 0.4 | PEEP 5 cmH2O | FiO2 0.4 | PEEP 5 cmH2O |
|
| FiO2 0.4 | PEEP 5-8 cmH2O | FiO2 0.45 | PEEP 5 cmH2O |
|
| FiO2 0.4 | PEEP 8-10cmH2O | FiO2 0.5 | PEEP 5 cmH2O |
|
| FiO2 0.5 | PEEP 10 cmH2O | FiO2 0.55 | PEEP 5 cmH2O |
|
| FiO2 0.6 | PEEP 10 cmH2O | FiO2 0.6 | PEEP 5 cmH2O |
|
| FiO2 0.6 | PEEP10-14cmH2O | FiO2 0.65 | PEEP 5 cmH2O |
|
| FiO2 0.6 | PEEP 15 cmH2O | FiO2 0.7 | PEEP 5 cmH2O |
|
| FiO2 0.7 | PEEP 15 cmH2O | FiO2 0.75 | PEEP 5 cmH2O |
|
| FiO2 0.8 | PEEP 15 cmH2O | FiO2 0.8 | PEEP 5 cmH2O |
|
| FiO2 0.9 | PEEP 15 cmH2O | FiO2 0.85 | PEEP 5 cmH2O |
|
| FiO2 1.0 | PEEP 15 cmH2O | FiO2 0.9 | PEEP 5 cmH2O |
|
| FiO2 0.95 | PEEP 5 cmH2O | ||
|
| FiO2 1.0 | PEEP 5 cmH2O | ||
Note:
If SpO2 dropped below 93% for > 5 min.
Figure 1Experimental flow chart.
The top line represents the experimental phases. Starting with stabilization after general anesthesia induction and preparation (stabilization), septic shock was induced by a high dose of LPS (160 µg kg−1 h−1) over 30 min. Then, the infusion rate of LPS was reduced to 16 µg kg−1 h−1. This was followed by a 6-h observation period (observation). The third line indicates the LPS dose. The fourth line indicates the duration of the periods.
Ventilatory, hemodynamic, and hematologic data.
| Parameter | Baseline | 3h | 6h | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean (SD) | ||||
|
| ||||
| no LPS | 16 ± 0.5 | 16 ± 0.3#2 | 16 ± 0.8#2 | |
| LTV | 16 ± 1.6 | 23 ± 11.6 | 27 ± 4.5 | |
| HTV | 17 ± 3 | 31 ± 4.5#2 | 30 ± 4.3#2 | |
| no LPS | 9 ± 0.2 | 9 ± 0.2#1,2 | 9 ± 0.2#1,2 | |
| LTV | 9 ± 0.8 | 11 ± 11 #1 | 16 ± 4.4 #1 | |
| HTV | 9 ± 1 | 13 ± 1.1#2 | 12 ± 1.1#2 | |
| no LPS | 12 ± 1 | 13 ± 1 | 13 ± 1 | |
| LTV | 12 ± 1 | 22 ± 12#1 | 25 ± 5#1 | |
| HTV | 14 ± 2 | 29 ± 5#2 | 27 ± 5#2 | |
| no LPS | 466 ± 52 | 437 ± 53#1,2 | 430 ± 65#1,2 | |
| LTV | 459 ± 71 | 200 ± 85#1 | 210 ± 43#1 | |
| HTV | 419 ± 57 | 278 ± 89 #2 | 188 ± 30#2 | |
| no LPS | 7.3 ± 0.2 | 7.2 ± 0.2#2 | 7.3 ± 0.1#2 | |
| LTV | 7.3 ± 0.6 | 7.0 ± 0.5#3 | 7.3 ± 0.4#3 | |
| HTV | 7.3 ± 0.3 | 15.5 ± 0.7#2,3 | 15.2 ± 0.5#2,3 | |
| no LPS | 36.0 ± 2.6 | 36.2 ± 2.6#2 | 34.7 ± 1.7#2 | |
|
| LTV | 36.6 ± 6.0 | 44.1 ± 4.0#3 | 46.3 ± 7.4#3 |
| HTV | 38.9 ± 3.9 | 18.6 ± 2.3#2,3 | 17.7 ± 2.0#2,3 | |
| no LPS | 8 ± 1 | 7 ± 1#2 | 7 ± 1#2 | |
|
| LTV | 8 ± 1 | 8 ± 10#3 | 10 ± 3#3 |
| HTV | 8 ± 0.3 | 5 ± 1#2,3 | 5 ± 0.4#2,3 | |
| no LPS | 0.36 ± 0 | 0.36 ± 0#1 | 0.36 ± 0#1,2 | |
|
| LTV | 0.36 ± 0 | 0.49 ± 0.2#1,2 | 0.46 ± 0.1#1 |
| HTV | 0.36 ± 0 | 0.37 ± 0#2 | 0.47 ± 0.2#2 | |
|
| ||||
| no LPS | 89 ± 11 | 91 ± 14#1,2 | 94 ± 22#1,2 | |
|
| LTV | 93 ± 15 | 206 ± 28#1 | 193 ± 23#1 |
| HTV | 101 ± 16 | 147 ± 39#2 | 181 ± 57#2 | |
| no LPS | 95 ± 21 | 93 ± 8#1,2 | 76 ± 3#1,2 | |
|
| LTV | 85 ± 13 | 66 ± 2#1 | 60 ± 5#1 |
| HTV | 90 ± 16 | 72 ± 13#2 | 64 ± 20#2 | |
| no LPS | 3 ± 0.4 | 3.4 ± 0.3 | 3.1 ± 0.4 | |
|
| LTV | 3.7 ± 0.8 | 3.1 ± 1.0 | 2.3 ± 1.5 |
| HTV | 3.8 ± 0.7 | 2.9 ± 0.3 | 2.6 ± 1.8 | |
| no LPS | 22 ± 5 | 22 ± 3 | 26 ± 5 | |
|
| LTV | 21 ± 4 | 43 ± 12#1 | 39 ± 13#1 |
| HTV | 22 ± 3 | 45 ± 13#2 | 47 ± 17#2 | |
| no LPS | 0 | 0#1,2 | 0#1,2 | |
| LTV | 0 | 0.67 ± 0.65#1 | 25.3 ± 18.2#1 | |
| HTV | 0 | 0.23 ± 0.3#2 | 4 ± 12.2#2,3 | |
|
| ||||
| no LPS | 14.5 ± 5.6 | 17.2 ± 4.7#1.2 | 16.3 ± 4.3#1,2 | |
|
| LTV | 10 ± 3.7 | 1.3 ± 0.5#1 | 1.9 ± 1#1 |
| HTV | 14 ± 4.6 | 1.3 ± 0.2#2 | 1.4 ± 0.6#2 | |
| no LPS | 225 ± 130 | 227 ± 102#1,2 | 218 ± 65#1,2 | |
|
| LTV | 211 ± 68 | 149 ± 85#1 | 157 ± 116#1 |
| HTV | 313 ± 103 | 154 ± 96#2 | 99 ± 148#2 |
Note:
Peak, Peak inspiratory pressure; Pmean, mean airway pressure; Pplat, Plateau pressure; PaO2 Fi02−1, oxygenation ratio; Vt, tidal volume; RR, respiratory ratio; PEEP, positive end-expiratory pressure; FiO2, fraction of inspired oxygen; HF, heart frequency, MAP, mean arterial pressure; CO, cardiac output; PA, mean arterial pressure; NA, dose of Norepinephrine; #p < 005 intergroup difference: 1 = no-LPS-group vs. LTV, 2 = no-LPS-group vs. HTV, 3 = LTV vs. HTV.
Figure 2Central venous HA concentrations.
HA plasma level determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays at baseline, after 3 and 6 h. Kruskal–Wallis test with the post-hoc Dunn test. The line in the boxes is the median; the top and bottom of the box represent the interquartile range; data within the whiskers are in the range of 1.5 times the interquartile range. #p < 0.05 vs. no-LPS-group; n = 20.
Figure 3Cerebral and pulmonary post-mortem analysis.
(A) Cerebral wet/dry ratio; (B) pulmonary wet/dry ratio; (C) lung injury score; Kruskal–Wallis test with the post-hoc Dunn test. The line in the boxes is the median; the top and bottom of the box represent the interquartile range; data within the whiskers are in the range of 1.5 times the interquartile range. The pulmonary and cerebral post-mortem analysis showed no significant difference between the experimental groups.