Protective ventilation in experimental acute respiratory distress syndrome after ventilator-induced lung injury: A randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Background Low tidal volume (VT), PEEP, and low plateau pressure (PPLAT) are lung protective during acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). This study tested the hypothesis that the aspiration of dead space (ASPIDS) together with computer simulation can help maintain gas exchange at these settings, thus promoting protection of the lungs.Methods ARDS was induced in pigs using surfactant perturbation plus an injurious ventilation strategy. One group then underwent 24 h protective ventilation, while control groups were ventilated using a conventional ventilation strategy at either high or low pressure. Pressurevolume curves (Pel/V), blood gases, and haemodynamics were studied at 0, 4, 8, 16, and 24 h after the induction of ARDS and lung histology was evaluated.Results The Pel/V curves showed improvements in the protective strategy group and deterioration in both control groups. In the protective group, when respiratory rate (RR) was ≈60 bpm, better oxygenation and reduced shunt were found. Histological damage was significantly more severe in the high-pressure group. There were no differences in venous oxygen saturation and pulmonary vascular resistance between the groups.Conclusions The protective ventilation strategy of adequate pH or with minimal VT, and high/safe PPLAT resulting in high PEEP was based on the avoidance of known lung-damaging phenomena. The approach is based upon the optimization of VT, RR, PEEP, I/E, and dead space. This study does not lend itself to conclusions about the independent role of each of these features. However, dead space reduction is fundamental for achieving minimal VT at high RR. Classical physiology is applicable at high RR. Computer simulation optimizes ventilation and limiting of dead space using ASPIDS. Inspiratory Pel/V curves recorded from PEEP or, even better, expiratory Pel/V curves allow monitoring in ARDS. © The Author [2012]. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Journal of Anaesthesia. All rights reserved.