help button home button
AJRCCM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Putensen, C.
Right arrow Articles by Lopez, F. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Putensen, C.
Right arrow Articles by Lopez, F. A.

Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., Vol 151, No. 4, Apr 1995, 993-999.

Interfacing between spontaneous breathing and mechanical ventilation affects ventilation-perfusion distributions in experimental bronchoconstriction

C Putensen, J Rasanen and FA Lopez
Department of Anesthesiology, University of South Florida, College of Medicine, Tampa.

The effect of interfacing between spontaneous and mechanical ventilation on ventilation-perfusion (VA/Q) distributions was determined during pressure-support ventilation (PSV) and in the presence and absence of spontaneous breathing during biphasic positive airway pressure (BIPAP) in 10 pigs with methacholine-induced bronchoconstriction. Whereas BIPAP without spontaneous breathing provides full and PSV breath-to-breath synchronized ventilatory support, BIPAP allows unrestricted spontaneous breathing throughout the mechanical cycle. Compared with BIPAP with and without spontaneous breathing, PSV effected an increase in ventilatory rate (p < 0.05) and a higher minute ventilation (VE) (p < 0.05). Spontaneous breathing during BIPAP accounted for 15 +/- 1% of the VE and increased cardiac output (CO) from 4.5 +/- 0.2 to 5.3 +/- 0.2 L/min (p < 0.05), Pao2 from 55 +/- 3 to 80 +/- 4 mm Hg (p < 0.05), and oxygen delivery (DO2) from 442 +/- 39 to 630 +/- 43 ml/min (p < 0.05). PSV did not increase CO, Pao2, and DO2. Spontaneous breathing did not affect oxygen consumption. During BIPAP spontaneous breathing accounted for a 15 +/- 2% decrease (p < 0.05) in blood flow to shunt units and a 16 +/- 2% increase (p < 0.05) in the perfusion of normal VA/Q units. Perfusion of shunt and normal VA/Q units was similar during PSV and BIPAP without spontaneous breathing. Dead space ventilation decreased with spontaneous breathing during BIPAP by 12% compared with PSV (p < 0.05). Dispersion of ventilation distribution was lowest during BIPAP. Uncoupling of spontaneous and mechanical ventilation during BIPAP improved gas exchange by allowing better VA/Q matching during experimental bronchoconstriction.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
G. Yu, K. Yang, A. B. Baker, and I. Young
The effect of bi-level positive airway pressure mechanical ventilation on gas exchange during general anaesthesia
Br. J. Anaesth., April 1, 2006; 96(4): 522 - 532.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
R. Dembinski, M. Max, R. Bensberg, R. Rossaint, and R. Kuhlen
Pressure Support Compared with Controlled Mechanical Ventilation in Experimental Lung Injury
Anesth. Analg., June 1, 2002; 94(6): 1570 - 1576.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Proc. Am. Thorac. Soc. Am. J. Respir. Cell Mol. Biol.
Copyright © 1995 American Thoracic Society