Pressure-controlled mechanical ventilation is more advantageous in the follow-up of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease after open heart surgery

Effect of Mechanical Ventilation Mode Type on Postoperative Pulmonary Complications After Cardiac Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

It is unknown whether there is a difference in pulmonary outcome in different intraoperative ventilation modes for cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). The aim of this trial was to determine whether patients undergoing cardiac surgery with CPB could benefit from intraoperative optimal ventilation mode.

DESIGN

This was a single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

The study was conducted at a single-center tertiary-care hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 1,364 adults undergoing cardiac surgery with CPB participated in this trial.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were assigned randomly (1:1:1) to receive 1 of 3 ventilation modes: volume-controlled ventilation (VCV), pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV), and pressure-controlled ventilation-volume guaranteed (PCV-VG). All arms of the study received the lung-protective ventilation strategy.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The primary outcome was a composite of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) within the first 7 postoperative days. Pulmonary complications occurred in 168 of 455 patients (36.9%) in the PCV-VG group, 171 (37.6%) in the PCV group, and 182 (40.1%) in the VCV group, respectively. There was no statistical difference in the risk of overall pulmonary complications among groups (p = 0.585). There were no significant differences in the severity grade of PPCs within 7 days, postoperative ventilation duration, intensive care unit stay, postoperative hospital stay, or 30-day postoperative mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients scheduled for cardiac surgery with CPB, intraoperative ventilation mode type did not affect the risk of postoperative pulmonary complications.

Clinical evaluation of ventilation mode on acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with respiratory failure

BACKGROUND

At present, understanding of the most effective ventilation methods for treating chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients experiencing acute worsening symptoms and respiratory failure remains relatively limited. This report analyzed the efficiency and side effects of various ventilation techniques used for individuals experiencing an acute COPD exacerbation.

AIM

To determine whether pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) can lower peak airway pressures (PAPs) and reduce the incidence of barotrauma compared to volume-controlled ventilation (VCV), without compromising clinical outcomes and oxygenation parameters.

METHODS

We have evaluated 600 patients who were hospitalized due to a severe COPD exacerbation, with 400 receiving mechanical ventilation for the respiratory failure. The participants were divided into two different groups, who were administered either VCV or PCV, along with appropriate management. We thereafter observed patients' attributes, clinical factors, and laboratory, radiographic, and arterial blood gas evaluations at the start and during their stay in the intensive care unit (ICU). We have also employed appropriate statistical methods for the data analysis.

RESULTS

Both the VCV and PCV groups experienced significant enhancements in the respiratory rate, tidal volume, and arterial blood gas values during their time in the ICU. However, no significant distinctions were detected between the groups in terms of oxygenation indices (partial pressures of oxygen/raction of inspired oxygen ratio) and partial pressures of carbon dioxide improvements. There was no considerable disparity observed between the VCV and PCV groups in the hospital mortality (32% vs 28%, P = 0.53), the number of days of ICU stay [median interquartile range (IQR): 9 (6-14) d vs 8 (5-13) d, P = 0.41], or the duration of the mechanical ventilation [median (IQR): 6 (4-10) d vs 5 (3-9) d, P = 0.47]. The PCV group displayed lower PAPs compared to the VCV group (P < 0.05) from the beginning of mechanical ventilation until extubation or ICU departure. The occurrence of barotrauma was considerably lower in the PCV group in comparison to the VCV group (6% vs 16%, P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Both VCV and PCV were found to be effective in treating patients with acute COPD exacerbation. However, PCV was associated with lower PAPs and a significant decrease in barotrauma, thus indicating that it might be a safer ventilation method for this group of patients. However, further large-scale study is necessary to confirm these findings and to identify the best ventilation approach for patients experiencing an acute COPD exacerbation.

A comparison of synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation and pressure-regulated volume control ventilation in elderly patients with acute exacerbations of COPD and respiratory failure

BACKGROUND

COPD is the third leading cause of death worldwide. Acute exacerbations of COPD may cause respiratory failure, requiring intensive care unit admission and mechanical ventilation. Intensive care unit patients with acute exacerbations of COPD requiring mechanical ventilation have higher mortality rates than other hospitalized patients. Although mechanical ventilation is the most effective intervention for these conditions, invasive ventilation techniques have yielded variable effects.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated pressure-regulated volume control (PRVC) ventilation treatment efficacy and preventive effects on pulmonary barotrauma in elderly COPD patients with respiratory failure.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-nine intubated patients were divided into experimental and control groups and treated with the PRVC and synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation - volume control methods, respectively. Vital signs, respiratory mechanics, and arterial blood gas analyses were monitored for 2-4 hours and 48 hours.

RESULTS

Both groups showed rapidly improved pH, partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), and PaO2 per fraction of inspired O2 levels and lower partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2) levels. The pH and PaCO2 levels at 2-4 hours were lower and higher, respectively, in the test group than those in the control group (P<0.05 for both); after 48 hours, blood gas analyses showed no statistical difference in any marker (P>0.05). Vital signs during 2-4 hours and 48 hours of treatment showed no statistical difference in either group (P>0.05). The level of peak inspiratory pressure in the experimental group after mechanical ventilation for 2-4 hours and 48 hours was significantly lower than that in the control group (P<0.05), while other variables were not significantly different between groups (P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

Among elderly COPD patients with respiratory failure, application of PRVC resulted in rapid improvement in arterial blood gas analyses while maintaining a low peak inspiratory pressure. PRVC can reduce pulmonary barotrauma risk, making it a safer protective ventilation mode than synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation - volume control.