Intensive Care Medicine

, Volume 37, Issue 9, pp 1494–1500 | Cite as

A physiologic comparison of proportional assist ventilation with load-adjustable gain factors (PAV+) versus pressure support ventilation (PSV)

  • R. Costa
  • G. Spinazzola
  • F. Cipriani
  • G. Ferrone
  • O. Festa
  • A. Arcangeli
  • M. Antonelli
  • R. Proietti
  • G. Conti
Original

Abstract

Purpose

To compare patient–ventilator interaction during PSV and PAV+ in patients that are difficult to wean.

Methods

This was a physiologic study involving 11 patients. During three consecutive trials (PSV first trial—PSV1, followed by PAV+, followed by a second PSV trial—PSV2, with the same settings as PSV1) we evaluated mechanical and patient respiratory pattern; inspiratory effort from excursion Pdi (swingPdi), and pressure–time products of the transdiaphragmatic (PTPdi) pressures. Inspiratory (delaytrinsp) and expiratory (delaytrexp) trigger delays, time of synchrony (timesyn), and asynchrony index (AI) were assessed.

Results

Compared to PAV+, during PSV trials, the mechanical inspiratory time (Tiflow) was significantly longer than patient inspiratory time (Tipat) (p < 0.05); Tipat showed a prolongation between PSV1 and PAV+, significant comparing PAV+ and PSV2 (p < 0.05). PAV+ significantly reduced delaytrexp (p < 0.001). The portion of tidal volume (VT) delivered in phase with Tipat (VTpat/VTmecc) was significantly higher during PAV+ (p < 0.01). The time of synchrony was significantly longer during PAV+ than during PSV (p < 0.001). During PSV 5 patients out of 11 showed an AI greater than 10%, whereas the AI was nil during PAV+.

Conclusion

PAV+ improves patient–ventilator interaction, significantly reducing the incidence of end-expiratory asynchrony and increasing the time of synchrony.

Keywords

Patient–ventilator synchrony Proportional assist ventilation Pressure support ventilation 

References

  1. 1.
    Tobin MJ (2001) Advances in mechanical ventilation. N Engl J Med 344:1986–1996PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kilburn KH (1966) Shock, seizures and coma with alkalosis during mechanical ventilation. Ann Intern Med 65:977–984PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ayres SM, Grace WJ (1969) Inappropriate ventilation and hypoxemia as causes of cardiac arrhythmias. The control of arrhythmias without antiarrhythmic drugs. Am J Med 46:495–505PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Argov Z, Mastaglia FL (1979) Disorders of neuromuscular transmission caused by drugs. New Engl J Med 301:409–413PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Le Bourdelles G, Viires N, Boczkowski J et al (1994) Effects of mechanical ventilation on diaphragmatic contractile properties in rats. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 149:1539–1544PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yamada Y, Du HL (2000) Analysis of the mechanisms of expiratory asynchrony in pressure support ventilation: a mathematical approach. J Appl Physiol 88:2134–2150Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Beck J, Gottfried SB, Navalesi P, Skrobik Y, Comtois N, Rossini M, Sinderby C (2001) Electrical activity of the diaphragm during pressure support ventilation in acute respiratory failure. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 164:419–424PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Thille AW, Rodriguez P, Cabello B, Lellouche F, Brochard L (2006) Patient–ventilator asynchrony during assisted mechanical ventilation. Intensive Care Med 32:1515–1522PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chao DC, Scheinhorn DJ, Stearn-Hassenpflug M (1997) Patient ventilator trigger asynchrony in prolonged mechanical ventilation. Chest 112:1592–1599PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Younes M (1994) Proportional assist ventilation. In: Tobin MJ (ed) Principles and practice of mechanical ventilation. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 349–369Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ranieri M, Giuliani R, Mascia L, Grasso S, Petruzzelli V, Puntillo N, Perchiazzi G, Fiore T, Brienza A (1996) Patient–ventilator interaction during acute hypercapnia: pressure support vs proportional assist ventilation. J Appl Physiol 81:426–436PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grasso S, Puntillo F, Mascia L, Ancona G, Fiore T, Bruno F, Slutsky AS, Ranieri VM (2000) Compensation for increase in respiratory workload during mechanical ventilation. Pressure-support versus proportional-assist ventilation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 161:819–826PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Giannouli E, Webster K, Roberts D, Younes M (1999) Response of ventilator-dependent patients to different levels of pressure support and proportional assist. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 159:1716–1725PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Navalesi P, Hernandez P, Wongsa A, La Porta D, Goldberg B, Gottfried S (1996) Proportional assist ventilation in acute respiratory failure; effects on breathing pattern and inspiratory effort. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 154:1330–1338PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Du HL, Ohtsuji M, Shigeta M, Chao DC, Sasaki K, Usuda Y, Yamada Y (2002) Expiratory asynchrony in proportional assist ventilation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 165:972–977PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Younes M, Kun J, Masiowski B, Webster K, Roberts D (2001) A method for noninvasive determination of inspiratory resistance during proportional assist ventilation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 163:829–839PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Younes M, Webster K, Kun J, Roberts D, Masiowski B (2001) A method for measuring passive elastance during proportional assist ventilation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 164:50–60PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kondili E, Prinianakis G, Alexopoulou C, Vakouti E, Klimathianaki M, Georgopoulos D (2006) Respiratory load compensation during mechanical ventilation—proportional assist ventilation with load-adjustable gain factors versus pressure support. Intensive Care Med 32:692–699PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Xirouchaki N, Kondili E, Vaporidi K, Xirouchakis G, Klimathianaki M, Gavriilidis G, Alexandopoulou E, Plataki M, Alexopoulou C, Georgopoulos D (2008) Proportional assist ventilation with load-adjustable gain factors in critically ill patients: comparison with pressure support. Intensive Care Med 34:2026–2031PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chiumello D, Pelosi P, Taccone P, Slutsky A, Gattinoni L (2003) Effect of different inspiratory rise time and cycling off criteria during pressure support ventilation in patients recovering from acute lung injury. Crit Care Med 31(11):2604–2610PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Baydur A, Behrakis PK, Zin WA, Jaeger M, Milic-Emili J (1982) A simple method for assessing the validity of the esophageal balloon technique. Am Rev Respir Dis 126:788–791PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Navalesi P, Costa R, Ceriana P, Carlucci A, Prinianakis G, Antonelli M, Conti G, Nava S (2007) Non invasive ventilation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients: helmet versus facial mask. Intensive Care Med 33:74–81Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Colombo D, Cammarota G, Bergamaschi V, De Lucia M, Della Corte FD, Navalesi P (2010) Physiologic response to varying levels of pressure support and neurally adjusted ventilatory assist in patients with acute respiratory failure. Intensive Care MedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Copyright jointly held by Springer and ESICM 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Costa
    • 1
    • 2
  • G. Spinazzola
    • 1
  • F. Cipriani
    • 1
  • G. Ferrone
    • 1
  • O. Festa
    • 1
  • A. Arcangeli
    • 1
  • M. Antonelli
    • 1
  • R. Proietti
    • 1
  • G. Conti
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Intensive Care and AnaesthesiaCatholic University of Rome, Policlinico Agostino GemelliRomeItaly
  2. 2.Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care MedicineUCSCRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations