STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of noninvasive assist-control ventilation (ACV) and pressure support ventilation (PSV) by nasal mask on respiratory physiologic parameters and comfort in acute hypercapnic respiratory failure (AHRF). DESIGN: A prospective randomized study. SETTING: A medical ICU. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS:Fifteen patients with COPD and AHRF were consecutively and randomly assigned to two noninvasive ventilation (NIV) sequences with ACV and PSV mode, spontaneous breathing (SB) via nasal mask being used as control. ACV and PSV settings were always subsequently adjusted according to patient's tolerance and air leaks. Fraction of inspired oxygen did not change between the sequences. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: ACV and PSV mode strongly decreased the inspiratory effort in comparison with SB. The total inspiratory work of breathing (WOBinsp) expressed as WOBinsp/tidal volume (VT) and WOBinsp/respiratory rate (RR), the pressure time product (PTP), and esophageal pressure variations (deltaPes) were the most discriminant parameters (p<0.001). ACV most reduced WOBinsp/VT (p<0.05), deltaPes (p<0.05), and PTP (0.01) compared with PSV mode. The surface diaphragmatic electromyogram activity was also decreased >32% as compared with control values (p<0.01), with no difference between the two modes. Simultaneously, NIV significantly improved breathing pattern (p<0.01) with no difference between ACV and PSV for VT, RR, minute ventilation, and total cycle duration. As compared to SB, respiratory acidosis was similarly improved by both modes. The respiratory comfort assessed by visual analog scale was less with ACV (57.23+/-30.12 mm) than with SB (75.15+/-18.25 mm) (p<0.05) and PSV mode (81.62+/-25.2 mm) (p<0.01) in our patients. CONCLUSIONS: During NIV for AHRF using settings adapted to patient's clinical tolerance and mask air leaks, both ACV and PSV mode provide respiratory muscle rest and similarly improve breathing pattern and gas exchange. However, these physiologic effects are achieved with a lower inspiratory workload but at the expense of a higher respiratory discomfort with ACV than with PSV mode.
RCT Entities:
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of noninvasive assist-control ventilation (ACV) and pressure support ventilation (PSV) by nasal mask on respiratory physiologic parameters and comfort in acute hypercapnic respiratory failure (AHRF). DESIGN: A prospective randomized study. SETTING: A medical ICU. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Fifteen patients with COPD and AHRF were consecutively and randomly assigned to two noninvasive ventilation (NIV) sequences with ACV and PSV mode, spontaneous breathing (SB) via nasal mask being used as control. ACV and PSV settings were always subsequently adjusted according to patient's tolerance and air leaks. Fraction of inspired oxygen did not change between the sequences. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS:ACV and PSV mode strongly decreased the inspiratory effort in comparison with SB. The total inspiratory work of breathing (WOBinsp) expressed as WOBinsp/tidal volume (VT) and WOBinsp/respiratory rate (RR), the pressure time product (PTP), and esophageal pressure variations (deltaPes) were the most discriminant parameters (p<0.001). ACV most reduced WOBinsp/VT (p<0.05), deltaPes (p<0.05), and PTP (0.01) compared with PSV mode. The surface diaphragmatic electromyogram activity was also decreased >32% as compared with control values (p<0.01), with no difference between the two modes. Simultaneously, NIV significantly improved breathing pattern (p<0.01) with no difference between ACV and PSV for VT, RR, minute ventilation, and total cycle duration. As compared to SB, respiratory acidosis was similarly improved by both modes. The respiratory comfort assessed by visual analog scale was less with ACV (57.23+/-30.12 mm) than with SB (75.15+/-18.25 mm) (p<0.05) and PSV mode (81.62+/-25.2 mm) (p<0.01) in our patients. CONCLUSIONS: During NIV for AHRF using settings adapted to patient's clinical tolerance and mask air leaks, both ACV and PSV mode provide respiratory muscle rest and similarly improve breathing pattern and gas exchange. However, these physiologic effects are achieved with a lower inspiratory workload but at the expense of a higher respiratory discomfort with ACV than with PSV mode.
Authors: Sean P Keenan; Tasnim Sinuff; Karen E A Burns; John Muscedere; Jim Kutsogiannis; Sangeeta Mehta; Deborah J Cook; Najib Ayas; Neill K J Adhikari; Lori Hand; Damon C Scales; Rose Pagnotta; Lynda Lazosky; Graeme Rocker; Sandra Dial; Kevin Laupland; Kevin Sanders; Peter Dodek Journal: CMAJ Date: 2011-02-14 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Christian R Osadnik; Vanessa S Tee; Kristin V Carson-Chahhoud; Joanna Picot; Jadwiga A Wedzicha; Brian J Smith Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2017-07-13
Authors: Michael J Banner; Carl G Tams; Neil R Euliano; Paul J Stephan; Trevor J Leavitt; A Daniel Martin; Nawar Al-Rawas; Andrea Gabrielli Journal: J Clin Monit Comput Date: 2015-06-13 Impact factor: 2.502
Authors: Karim Chadda; Bernard Clair; David Orlikowski; Gilles Macadoux; Jean Claude Raphael; Frédéric Lofaso Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2004 Impact factor: 3.210
Authors: Brigitte Fauroux; Bruno Louis; Nicholas Hart; Sandrine Essouri; Karl Leroux; Annick Clément; Michael Ian Polkey; Frédéric Lofaso Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2004-01-16 Impact factor: 17.440