Literature DB >> 7149449

Comparison of esophageal, tracheal, and mouth occlusion pressure in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease during acute respiratory failure.

D Murciano, M Aubier, S Bussi, J P Derenne, R Pariente, J Milic-Emili.   

Abstract

In 14 acutely ill patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who were either intubated or breathed via a tracheostomy, we measured the pressures generated in the esophagus and trachea during the first 0.1 s of spontaneous inspiratory efforts against closed airway (P0.1). No significant difference was found between P0.1 in the trachea and esophagus, where it was measured at 2 balloon levels (distance from balloon tip to nares: 35 and 45 cm). In 4 of the patients we also compared esophageal and mouth occlusion pressures during mouth breathing, the orifice of tracheostomy being temporarily obstructed. Mouth P0.1 in the 4 patients averaged approximately 47% of the esophageal occlusion pressure (4.4 +/- 1.7 versus 8.9 +/- 3.1 cm H2O, respectively). Because in patients with COPD with upper airways bypassed (tracheostomized or intubated) the changes in esophageal and tracheal pressure during occluded respiratory efforts were similar, it is concluded that the difference between esophageal and mouth occlusion pressure is due to the tissue compliance of the oropharynx.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1982        PMID: 7149449     DOI: 10.1164/arrd.1982.126.5.837

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am Rev Respir Dis        ISSN: 0003-0805


  18 in total

1.  Assisted ventilation 6. Non-invasive and domiciliary ventilation: positive pressure techniques.

Authors:  M A Branthwaite
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  1991-03       Impact factor: 9.139

Review 2.  Assisted ventilation. 4. Weaning from mechanical ventilation.

Authors:  J Goldstone; J Moxham
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 9.139

3.  Measurement of lung mechanics at different lung volumes and esophageal levels in normal subjects: effect of posture change.

Authors:  A Baydur; C S Sassoon; M Carlson
Journal:  Lung       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 2.584

Review 4.  Assessment of respiratory muscle function and strength.

Authors:  N Syabbalo
Journal:  Postgrad Med J       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 2.401

5.  P 0.1/PIMax: an index for assessing respiratory capacity in acute respiratory failure.

Authors:  R Fernández; J Cabrera; N Calaf; S Benito
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 17.440

6.  Inspiratory effort and occlusion pressure in triggered mechanical ventilation.

Authors:  R Fernández; S Benito; J Sanchis; J Milic-Emili; A Net
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 17.440

7.  High O2 Flow Rates Required to Achieve Acceptable FiO2 in CPAP-Treated Patients With Severe Covid-19: A Clinically Based Bench Study.

Authors:  Marius Lebret; Emeline Fresnel; Guillaume Prieur; Jean Quieffin; Johan Dupuis; Bouchra Lamia; Yann Combret; Clément Medrinal
Journal:  Arch Bronconeumol (Engl Ed)       Date:  2021-04-26       Impact factor: 4.872

8.  The airway occlusion pressure (P0.1) to monitor respiratory drive during mechanical ventilation: increasing awareness of a not-so-new problem.

Authors:  Irene Telias; Felipe Damiani; Laurent Brochard
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2018-01-19       Impact factor: 17.440

9.  P0.1 is a useful parameter in setting the level of pressure support ventilation.

Authors:  A Alberti; F Gallo; A Fongaro; S Valenti; A Rossi
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 17.440

10.  Effects of extrinsic positive end-expiratory pressure on mechanically ventilated patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and dynamic hyperinflation.

Authors:  D Georgopoulos; E Giannouli; D Patakas
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 17.440

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.