help button home button
AJRCCM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sottiaux, T.
Right arrow Articles by Blanch, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sottiaux, T.
Right arrow Articles by Blanch, L.
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine Vol 167. pp. 1575, (2003)
© 2003 American Thoracic Society


Correspondence

Recruitment maneuvers in ARDS

To the Editor:

Villagra and colleagues evaluate a recruitment maneuver in severe primary acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients (1). Patients are ventilated according to the principle of lung protective ventilation. A recruitment maneuver is applied by using a pressure controlled mode of ventilation (PCV) with an inspiratory plateau pressure of 50 cm H2O and a positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) level higher than the upper inflexion point. The conclusion is: when an "ideal" lung protective ventilation is applied, surimposed recruitment maneuvers do not improve oxygenation in the majority of these ARDS patients (1).

Primary ARDS is characterized by lung consolidation, and PEEP and recruitment maneuvers may induce overdistension phenomena of normal lung regions (with diversion of blood flow to diseased regions) and only marginal alveolar recruitment. High PEEP levels and recruitment maneuvers in "primary" ARDS patients may be either ineffective or detrimental (24).

During PCV, alveolar recruitment is dependent on the inspiratory time constant ({tau}) of the respiratory system: passive equilibration between airways and lung needs an inspiratory time (TI) equal to three to four times {tau} (5). During recruitment maneuver with PCV, some data are lacking in the study (1). We calculate that RRS and mean {tau} probably reach 17 cm H2O · L-1 · s-1 and 0.5 seconds, respectively: passive equilibration between airways and lung during PCV probably needs 1.5 to 2 seconds. In this study, is the "mechanical" TI long enough to allow full pressure equilibration between the airways and the lung and to promote optimal alveolar recruitment? If TI is too "short," pressure equilibration does not have the time to occur. If the ventilatory parameters are the same as during VC, we may calculate that TI reaches 0.7 seconds. We can see the discrepancy between the "mechanical" TI and TI needed to allow the best possible alveolar recruitment. If mechanical TI is too short, VT may be reduced with alveolar hypoventilation. As Villagra and colleagues apply the maneuver for a relatively long period (more than 2 minutes), respiratory acidosis occurs (1).

Are the authors using a high level of PEEP (30 cm H2O) with the aim to recruit the lungs or to maintain alveolar recruitment? For the first aim, this PEEP level is probably too low; for the second one, this PEEP level is too high (6). Recruitment maneuver has to open the lungs and place the ventilatory system on the deflation part of the pressure–volume curve and PEEP has to keep the ventilatory system above the critical lung closing pressure (2).

The study shows that recruitment maneuvers may be ineffective and deleterious. Are the authors really applying ventilatory parameters promoting alveolar recruitment and keeping the lungs open? And is it possible to recruit consolidated lung area without inducing dangerous phenomenon of hyperinflation? Recruitment maneuvers may be unnecessary or dangerous according to the modality of application, the etiology of ARDS, but also when an "ideal" lung protective ventilation is applied (6). We urgently need further evaluations concerning the modalities of application, the expected benefits/hazards and the accurate indications of recruitment maneuvers.

Thierry Sottiaux

Gosselies Hospital Belgium

REFERENCES

  1. Villagrá A, Ochavía A, Vatua S, Murias G, Fernández MDL, Aguilar JL, Fernández R, Blanch L. Recruitment maneuvers during lung protective ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2002;165:165–170.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Rimensberger PC, Pristine G, Mullen JBM, Cox PN, Slutsky AS. Lung recruitment during small tidal volume ventilation allows positive end-expiratory pressure without lung injury. Crit Care Med 1999;27:1940–1945.[CrossRef][Medline]
  3. Gattinoni L, Pelosi P, Suter P, Pedoto A, Vercesi P, Lissoni A. Acute respiratory distress syndrome caused by pulmonary and extrapulmonary disease. Different syndromes? Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1998;158:3–11.
  4. Van der Kloot TE, Blanch L, Youngblood AM, Weinert C, Adams AB, Marini JJ, Shapiro RS, Nahum A. Recruitment maneuvers in three experimental models of acute injury. Effect on lung volume and gas exchange. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000;161:1485–1494.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Dupuis YG. The constant pressure generator. In: Dupuis YG. Ventilators. Theory and clinical applications. St. Louis, MO: Mosby; 1992. p. 49–62.
  6. Sottiaux T. Lung recruitment and stabilization in ARDS. In: Vincent JL, editor. Yearbook of intensive care and emergency medicine. Berlin: Springer; 2001. p. 418–434.

 

From the Authors:

We thank Dr. Sottiaux for his interest regarding our study (1). Although lung protective strategies to provide mechanical ventilation for the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patient are widely accepted, the role of recruitment maneuvers as an adjunct to mechanical ventilation remains to be determined. At present, many methods are proposed to recruit the lungs but lack guidance regarding which should be used (2). We performed alveolar recruitment by switching ventilatory mode from volume control constant flow to pressure control decelerating flow (mean peak pressure 47 ± 4.5 cm H2O) and by using high positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) levels (30 ± 4.9 cm H2O) to prevent alveolar derecruitment during expiration. In patients with ARDS ventilated at constant peak inspiratory pressure, when hysteresis is reduced with increasing PEEP, the inflation curve approximates the deflation curve, and pressure–volume slope may decrease with optimum PEEP (3). Consequently, compliance is nonlinear over inflation volume and it is very low in the upper segment of the lung pressure–volume relationship (4). Therefore, despite appropriate driving pressures during pressure control ventilation (difference between airway pressure at end inspiration and PEEP) low tidal ventilation and respiratory acidosis will invariably occur. Mathematical models (3) and human studies (5) predict almost the end of alveolar recruitment in those conditions. To accomplish full alveolar recruitment of the whole lung during pressure control ventilation at high PEEP levels would require potentially dangerous peak inspiratory pressures. Our study showed that recruitment maneuvers in ARDS patients superimposed to high PEEP ventilation had minimal and short lived effect on oxygenation (1). However, we agree with Dr. Sottiaux that further studies are needed to argue for or against the use of recruitment maneuvers in patients with ARDS.

Ana Villagrá, Josefina López Aguilar and Lluis Blanch

Hospital de Sabadell Corporació Parc Taulí Sabadell, Spain

REFERENCES

  1. Villagrá A, Ochagavía A, Vatua S, Murias G, Fernández MDM, López Aguilar J, Fernández R, Blanch L. Recruitment maneuvers during lung protective ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2002;165:165–170.
  2. Hess D. Lung recruitment: the role of recruitment maneuvers. Respir Care 2002;47:308–317.[Medline]
  3. Hickling KG. The pressure-volume curve is greatly modified by recruitment. A methamatical model of ARDS lungs. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1998;158:194–202.
  4. Lichtwarck-Aschoff M, Mols G, Hedlund AJ, Kessler V, Markström AM. Guttmann, Hedenstierna G, Sjöstrand UH. Compliance is nonlinear over tidal volume irrespective of positive end-expiratory pressure level in surfactant-depleted piglets. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000;162:2125–2133.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Crotti S, Mascheroni D, Caironi P, Pelosi P, Ronzoni G, Mondino M, Marini JJ, Gattinoni L. Recruitment and derecruitment during acute respiratory failure: a clinical study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2001;164:131–140.[Abstract/Free Full Text]




This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sottiaux, T.
Right arrow Articles by Blanch, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sottiaux, T.
Right arrow Articles by Blanch, L.


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Proc. Am. Thorac. Soc. Am. J. Respir. Cell Mol. Biol.
Copyright © 2003 American Thoracic Society