Recruitment-to-inflation Ratio Assessed through Sequential End-expiratory Lung Volume Measurement in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Recruitment-to-inflation ratio to assess response to PEEP during laparoscopic surgery: A physiologic study

STUDY OBJECTIVE

During laparoscopic surgery, the role of PEEP to improve outcome is controversial. Mechanistically, PEEP benefits depend on the extent of alveolar recruitment, which prevents ventilator-induced lung injury by reducing lung dynamic strain. The hypotheses of this study were that pneumoperitoneum-induced aeration loss and PEEP-induced recruitment are inter-individually variable, and that the recruitment-to-inflation ratio (R/I) can identify patients who benefit from PEEP in terms of strain reduction.

DESIGN

Sequential study.

SETTING

Operating room.

PATIENTS

Seventeen ASA I-III patients receiving robot-assisted prostatectomy during Trendelenburg pneumoperitoneum.

INTERVENTIONS AND MEASUREMENTS

Patients underwent end-expiratory lung volume (EELV) and respiratory/lung/chest wall mechanics (esophageal manometry and inspiratory/expiratory occlusions) assessment at PEEP = 0 cmH2O before and after pneumoperitoneum, at PEEP = 4 and 12 cmH2O during pneumoperitoneum. Pneumoperitoneum-induced derecruitment and PEEP-induced recruitment were assessed through a simplified method based on multiple pressure-volume curve. Dynamic and static strain changes were evaluated. R/I between 12 and 4 cmH2O was assessed from EELV. Inter-individual variability was rated with the ratio of standard deviation to mean (CoV).

MAIN RESULTS

Pneumoperitoneum reduced EELV by (median [IqR]) 410 mL [80-770] (p < 0.001) and increased dynamic strain by 0.04 [0.01-0.07] (p < 0.001), with high inter-individual variability (CoV = 70% and 88%, respectively). Compared to PEEP = 4 cmH2O, PEEP = 12 cmH2O yielded variable amount of recruitment (139 mL [96-366] CoV = 101%), causing different extent of dynamic strain reduction (median decrease 0.02 [0.01-0.04], p = 0.002; CoV = 86%) and static strain increases (median increase 0.05 [0.04-0.07], p = 0.01, CoV = 33%). R/I (1.73 [0.58-3.35]) estimated the decrease in dynamic strain (p ≤0.001, r = -0.90) and the increase in static strain (p = 0.009, r = -0.73) induced by PEEP, while PEEP-induced changes in respiratory and lung mechanics did not.

CONCLUSIONS

Trendelenburg pneumoperitoneum yields variable derecruitment: PEEP capability to revert these phenomena varies significantly among individuals. High R/I identifies patients in whom higher PEEP mostly reduces dynamic strain with limited static strain increases, potentially allowing individualized settings.

Intraoperative Ventilation/Perfusion Mismatch and Postoperative Pulmonary Complications after Major Noncardiac Surgery: A Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pulmonary complications can increase hospital length of stay, postoperative morbidity, and mortality. Although many factors can increase the risk of postoperative pulmonary complications, it is not known whether intraoperative ventilation/perfusion (V/Q) mismatch can be associated with an increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications after major noncardiac surgery.

METHODS

This study enrolled patients undergoing general anesthesia for noncardiac surgery and evaluated intraoperative V/Q distribution using the automatic lung parameter estimator technique. The assessment was done after anesthesia induction, after 1 h from surgery start, and at the end of surgery. Demographic and procedural information were collected, and intraoperative ventilatory and hemodynamic parameters were measured at each timepoint. Patients were followed up for 7 days after surgery and assessed daily for postoperative pulmonary complication occurrence.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 101 patients with a median age of 71 [62 to 77] years, a body mass index of 25 [22.4 to 27.9] kg/m2, and a preoperative Assess Respiratory Risk in Surgical Patients in Catalonia (ARISCAT) score of 41 [34 to 47]. Of these patients, 29 (29%) developed postoperative pulmonary complications, mainly acute respiratory failure (23%) and pleural effusion (11%). Patients with and without postoperative pulmonary complications did not differ in levels of shunt at T1 (postoperative pulmonary complications: 22.4% [10.4 to 35.9%] vs. no postoperative pulmonary complications:19.3% [9.4 to 24.1%]; P = 0.18) or during the protocol, whereas significantly different levels of high V/Q ratio were found during surgery (postoperative pulmonary complications: 13 [11 to 15] mmHg vs. no postoperative pulmonary complications: 10 [8 to 13.5] mmHg; P = 0.007) and before extubation (postoperative pulmonary complications: 13 [11 to 14] mmHg vs. no postoperative pulmonary complications: 10 [8 to 12] mmHg; P = 0.006). After adjusting for age, ARISCAT, body mass index, smoking, fluid balance, anesthesia type, laparoscopic procedure and surgery duration, high V/Q ratio before extubation was independently associated with the development of postoperative pulmonary complications (odds ratio, 1.147; 95% CI, 1.021 to 1.289; P = 0.02). The sensitivity analysis showed an E-value of 1.35 (CI, 1.11).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with intermediate or high risk of postoperative pulmonary complications undergoing major noncardiac surgery, intraoperative V/Q mismatch is associated with the development of postoperative pulmonary complications. Increased high V/Q ratio before extubation is independently associated with the occurrence of postoperative pulmonary complications in the first 7 days after surgery.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Recruitment-Potential-Oriented Mechanical Ventilation Protocol and Narrative Review for Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Even though much progress has been made to improve clinical outcomes, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remains a significant cause of acute respiratory failure. Protective mechanical ventilation is the backbone of supportive care for these patients; however, there are still many unresolved issues in its setting. The primary goal of mechanical ventilation is to improve oxygenation and ventilation. The use of positive pressure, especially positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), is mandatory in this approach. However, PEEP is a double-edged sword. How to safely set positive end-inspiratory pressure has long been elusive to clinicians. We hereby propose a pressure-volume curve measurement-based method to assess whether injured lungs are recruitable in order to set an appropriate PEEP. For the most severe form of ARDS, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is considered as the salvage therapy. However, the high level of medical resources required and associated complications make its use in patients with severe ARDS controversial. Our proposed protocol also attempts to propose how to improve patient outcomes by balancing the possible overuse of resources with minimizing patient harm due to dangerous ventilator settings. A recruitment-potential-oriented evaluation-based protocol can effectively stabilize hypoxemic conditions quickly and screen out truly serious patients.

Recruitment-to-inflation ratio reflects the impact of peep on dynamic lung strain in a highly recruitable model of ARDS

BACKGROUND

The recruitment-to-inflation ratio (R/I) has been recently proposed to bedside assess response to PEEP. The impact of PEEP on ventilator-induced lung injury depends on the extent of dynamic strain reduction. We hypothesized that R/I may reflect the potential for lung recruitment (i.e. recruitability) and, consequently, estimate the impact of PEEP on dynamic lung strain, both assessed through computed tomography scan.

METHODS

Fourteen lung-damaged pigs (lipopolysaccharide infusion) underwent ventilation at low (5 cmH2O) and high PEEP (i.e., PEEP generating a plateau pressure of 28-30 cmH2O). R/I was measured through a one-breath derecruitment maneuver from high to low PEEP. PEEP-induced changes in dynamic lung strain, difference in nonaerated lung tissue weight (tissue recruitment) and amount of gas entering previously nonaerated lung units (gas recruitment) were assessed through computed tomography scan. Tissue and gas recruitment were normalized to the weight and gas volume of previously ventilated lung areas at low PEEP (normalized-tissue recruitment and normalized-gas recruitment, respectively).

RESULTS

Between high (median [interquartile range] 20 cmH2O [18-21]) and low PEEP, median R/I was 1.08 [0.88-1.82], indicating high lung recruitability. Compared to low PEEP, tissue and gas recruitment at high PEEP were 246 g [182-288] and 385 ml [318-668], respectively. R/I was linearly related to normalized-gas recruitment (r = 0.90; [95% CI 0.71 to 0.97) and normalized-tissue recruitment (r = 0.69; [95% CI 0.25 to 0.89]). Dynamic lung strain was 0.37 [0.29-0.44] at high PEEP and 0.59 [0.46-0.80] at low PEEP (p < 0.001). R/I was significantly related to PEEP-induced reduction in dynamic (r = - 0.93; [95% CI - 0.78 to - 0.98]) and global lung strain (r = - 0.57; [95% CI - 0.05 to - 0.84]). No correlation was found between R/I and and PEEP-induced changes in static lung strain (r = 0.34; [95% CI - 0.23 to 0.74]).

CONCLUSIONS

In a highly recruitable ARDS model, R/I reflects the potential for lung recruitment and well estimates the extent of PEEP-induced reduction in dynamic lung strain.

Recruitment-to-inflation ratio for bedside PEEP selection in acute respiratory distress syndrome

In acute respiratory distress syndrome, the role of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) to prevent ventilator-induced lung injury is controversial. Randomized trials comparing higher versus lower PEEP strategies failed to demonstrate a clinical benefit. This may depend on the inter-individually variable potential for lung recruitment (i.e. recruitability), which would warrant PEEP individualization to balance alveolar recruitment and the unavoidable baby lung overinflation produced by high pressure. Many techniques have been used to assess recruitability, including lung imaging, multiple pressure-volume curves and lung volume measurement. The Recruitment-to-Inflation ratio (R/I) has been recently proposed to bedside assess recruitability without additional equipment. R/I assessment is a simplified technique based on the multiple pressure-volume curve concept: it is measured by monitoring respiratory mechanics and exhaled tidal volume during a 10-cmH2O one-breath derecruitment maneuver after a short high-PEEP test. R/I scales recruited volume to respiratory system compliance, and normalizes recruitment to a proxy of actual lung size. With modest R/I (<0.3-0.4), setting low PEEP (5-8 cmH2O) may be advisable; with R/I>0.6-0.7, high PEEP (≥15 cmH2O) can be considered, provided that airway and/or transpulmonary plateau pressure do not exceed safety limits. In case of intermediate R/I (≈0.5), a more granular assessment of recruitability may be needed. This could be accomplished with advanced monitoring tools, like sequential lung volume measurement with granular R/I assessment or electrical impedance tomography monitoring during a decremental PEEP trial. In this review, we discuss R/I rationale, applications and limits, providing insights on its clinical use for PEEP selection in moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome.

High vs Low PEEP in Patients With ARDS Exhibiting Intense Inspiratory Effort During Assisted Ventilation: A Randomized Crossover Trial

BACKGROUND

Positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) can potentially modulate inspiratory effort (ΔPes), which is the major determinant of self-inflicted lung injury.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does high PEEP reduce ΔPes in patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS on assisted ventilation?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Sixteen patients with Pao2/Fio2 ≤ 200 mm Hg and ΔPes ≥ 10 cm H2O underwent a randomized sequence of four ventilator settings: PEEP = 5 cm H2O or PEEP = 15 cm H2O + synchronous (pressure support ventilation [PSV]) or asynchronous (pressure-controlled intermittent mandatory ventilation [PC-IMV]) inspiratory assistance. ΔPes and respiratory system, lung, and chest wall mechanics were assessed with esophageal manometry and occlusions. PEEP-induced alveolar recruitment and overinflation, lung dynamic strain, and tidal volume distribution were assessed with electrical impedance tomography.

RESULTS

ΔPes was not systematically different at high vs low PEEP (pressure support ventilation: median, 20 cm H2O; interquartile range (IQR), 15-24 cm H2O vs median, 15 cm H2O; IQR, 13-23 cm H2O; P = .24; pressure-controlled intermittent mandatory ventilation: median, 20; IQR, 18-23 vs median, 19; IQR, 17-25; P = .67, respectively). Similarly, respiratory system and transpulmonary driving pressures, tidal volume, lung/chest wall mechanics, and pendelluft extent were not different between study phases. High PEEP resulted in lower or higher ΔPes, respiratory system driving pressure, and transpulmonary driving pressure according to whether this increased or decreased respiratory system compliance (r = -0.85, P < .001; r = -0.75, P < .001; r = -0.80, P < .001, respectively). PEEP-induced changes in respiratory system compliance were driven by its lung component and were dependent on the extent of PEEP-induced alveolar overinflation (r = -0.66, P = .006). High PEEP caused variable recruitment and systematic redistribution of tidal volume toward dorsal lung regions, thereby reducing dynamic strain in ventral areas (pressure support ventilation: median, 0.49; IQR, 0.37-0.83 vs median, 0.96; IQR, 0.62-1.56; P = .003; pressure-controlled intermittent mandatory ventilation: median, 0.65; IQR, 0.42-1.31 vs median, 1.14; IQR, 0.79-1.52; P = .002). All results were consistent during synchronous and asynchronous inspiratory assistance.

INTERPRETATION

The impact of high PEEP on ΔPes and lung stress is interindividually variable according to different effects on the respiratory system and lung compliance resulting from alveolar overinflation. High PEEP may help mitigate the risk of self-inflicted lung injury solely if it increases lung/respiratory system compliance.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT04241874; URL: www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov.

Monitoring lung recruitment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review explores lung recruitment monitoring, covering techniques, challenges, and future perspectives.

RECENT FINDINGS

Various methodologies, including respiratory system mechanics evaluation, arterial bold gases (ABGs) analysis, lung imaging, and esophageal pressure (Pes) measurement are employed to assess lung recruitment. In support to ABGs analysis, the assessment of respiratory mechanics with hysteresis and recruitment-to-inflation ratio has the potential to evaluate lung recruitment and enhance mechanical ventilation setting. Lung imaging tools, such as computed tomography scanning, lung ultrasound, and electrical impedance tomography (EIT) confirm their utility in following lung recruitment with the advantage of radiation-free and repeatable application at the bedside for sonography and EIT. Pes enables the assessment of dorsal lung tendency to collapse through end-expiratory transpulmonary pressure. Despite their value, these methodologies may require an elevated expertise in their application and data interpretation. However, the information obtained by these methods may be conveyed to build machine learning and artificial intelligence algorithms aimed at improving the clinical decision-making process.

SUMMARY

Monitoring lung recruitment is a crucial component of managing patients with severe lung conditions, within the framework of a personalized ventilatory strategy. Although challenges persist, emerging technologies offer promise for a personalized approach to care in the future.

Setting positive end-expiratory pressure: does the 'best compliance' concept really work?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Determining the optimal positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) setting remains a central yet debated issue in the management of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).The 'best compliance' strategy set the PEEP to coincide with the peak respiratory system compliance (or 2 cmH 2 O higher) during a decremental PEEP trial, but evidence is conflicting.

RECENT FINDINGS

The physiological rationale that best compliance is always representative of functional residual capacity and recruitment has raised serious concerns about its efficacy and safety, due to its association with increased 28-day all-cause mortality in a randomized clinical trial in ARDS patients.Moreover, compliance measurement was shown to underestimate the effects of overdistension, and neglect intra-tidal recruitment, airway closure, and the interaction between lung and chest wall mechanics, especially in obese patients. In response to these concerns, alternative approaches such as recruitment-to-inflation ratio, the nitrogen wash-in/wash-out technique, and electrical impedance tomography (EIT) are gaining attention to assess recruitment and overdistention more reliably and precisely.

SUMMARY

The traditional 'best compliance' strategy for determining optimal PEEP settings in ARDS carries risks and overlooks some key physiological aspects. The advent of new technologies and methods presents more reliable strategies to assess recruitment and overdistention, facilitating personalized approaches to PEEP optimization.