Literature DB >> 6767582

Intermittent mandatory ventilation; is synchronization important?

T J Heenan, J B Downs, M E Douglas, B C Ruiz, L Jumper.   

Abstract

Intermittent mandatory ventilation (IMV) allows patients to breathe spontaneously between mechanically supported breaths. Recently, several manufacturers have implied that nonsynchronous application of the mechanical breath may depress cardiovascular function and increase pulmonary barotrauma. Because it is technically difficult and expensive to synchronize mechanical ventilation to spontaneous breathing, we sought to determine whether there is any significant difference in cardiopulmonary function during synchronous and nonsynchronous mandatory ventilation. Our investigation failed to support the hypothesis that synchronization of spontaneous and mechanically mediated breathing is physiologically beneficial.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1980        PMID: 6767582     DOI: 10.1378/chest.77.5.598

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Chest        ISSN: 0012-3692            Impact factor:   9.410


  2 in total

1.  IMPRV--synchronized APRV, or more?

Authors:  J Räsänen
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 17.440

Review 2.  Alternative modes of ventilation. Part I. Disadvantages of controlled mechanical ventilation: intermittent mandatory ventilation.

Authors:  S M Willatts
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 17.440

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.