Comparison of pleural and esophageal pressure in supine and prone positions in a porcine model of acute respiratory distress syndrome

14Citations
Citations of this article
34Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) benefit from prone positioning. Although the accuracy of esophageal pressure (Pes) to estimate regional pleural pressure (Ppl) has previously been assessed in the supine position, such data are not available in the prone position in ARDS. In six anesthetized, paralyzed, and mechanically ventilated female pigs, we measured Pes and Ppl into dorsal and ventral parts of the right pleural cavity. Airway pressure (Paw) and flow were measured at the airway opening. Severe ARDS [arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2)/fraction of inspired oxygen (FIO2) < 100 mmHg at positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) of 5 cmH2O] was induced by surfactant depletion. In supine and prone positions assigned in a random order, PEEP was set to 20, 15, 10, and 5 cmH2O and static endexpiratory chest wall pressures were measured from Pes (PEEPtot,es) and dorsal (PEEPtot,PplD) and ventral (PEEPtot,PplV) Ppl. The magnitude of the difference between PEEPtot,es and PEEPtot,PplD was similar in each position [-3.6 cmH2O in supine vs. -3.8 cmH2O in prone at PEEP 20 cmH2O (PEEP 20)]. The difference between PEEPtot,es and PEEPtot,PplV became narrower in the prone position (-8.3 cmH2O supine vs. -3.0 cmH2O prone at PEEP 20). PEEPtot, PplV was overestimated by Pes in the prone position at higher pressures. The median (1st-3rd quartiles) dorsal-to-ventral Ppl gradient was 4.4 (2.4-6.8) cmH2O in the supine position and -1.5 (-3.5 to +1.1) cmH2O in the prone position (P < 0.0001) and marginally influenced by PEEP (P = 0.058). Prone position narrowed endexpiratory dorsal-to-ventral Ppl vertical gradient, likely because of a more even distribution of mechanical forces over the chest wall. NEW & NOTEWORTHY In a porcine model of acute respiratory distress syndrome, we found that static end-expiratory esophageal pressure did not change significantly in prone position compared with supine position at any positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) tested between 5 and 20 cmH2O. Prone position was associated with an increased ventral pleural pressure and reduced end-expiratory dorsalto- ventral pleural pressure (Ppl) vertical gradient, likely due to a more even distribution of mechanical forces over the chest wall. acute respiratory distress syndrome; esophageal pressure; pleural.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Terzi, N., Bayat, S., Noury, N., Turbil, E., Habre, W., Argaud, L., … Guérin, C. (2020). Comparison of pleural and esophageal pressure in supine and prone positions in a porcine model of acute respiratory distress syndrome. Journal of Applied Physiology, 128(6), 1617–1625. https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.00251.2020

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free