Scholarlink

Introduction <p>End-inspiratory pause (EIP) is traditionally discouraged in mechanically ventilated patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) because it shortens expiratory time (T<sub>E</sub>) and may worsen hyperinflation. Previous data in hypoxemic patients suggest that, at equal total inspiratory time (T<sub>I</sub>), shorter insufflations followed by EIP can improve CO₂ elimination. Whether this strategy is effective and safe in obstructive lung disease remains unknown.</p> Objective <p>To evaluate whether a ventilation with high inspiratory flow and EIP reduces arterial carbon dioxide (PaCO₂) without increasing hyperinflation in mechanically ventilated patients with COPD undergoing controlled hypoventilation.</p> Methods <p>Prospective, single-center, randomized, cross-over physiological study including sedated, intubated adult patients with acute exacerbation of COPD, PaCO₂ ≥45 mmHg, and no spontaneous respiratory effort. Patients were randomized to two 30-minute ventilation strategies in volume-controlled mode: conventional ventilation without EIP (Vent<sub>NO−PAUSE</sub>) and ventilation with EIP (Vent<sub>PAUSE</sub>), in which inspiratory flow was increased and 40–50% of T<sub>I</sub> was replaced by an EIP. Total T<sub>I</sub> and T<sub>E</sub> were identical in both strategies. Arterial blood gases, respiratory mechanics, and hemodynamics were recorded.</p> Results <p>Vent<sub>PAUSE</sub> significantly reduced PaCO₂ (58.5 ± 9.4 to 52.6 ± 10.4 mmHg; <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001) and increased arterial pH (7.31 ± 0.09 to 7.34 ± 0.08; <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001). Ventilatory ratio decreased (<i>P</i> &lt; 0.001), indicating improved ventilatory efficiency. Oxygenation improved (PaO₂ and PaO₂/FiO₂; <i>P</i> &lt; 0.05), while the alveolar–to–arterial oxygen difference was unchanged (<i>p</i> = 0.813). Total PEEP and auto-PEEP were not affected (<i>P</i> &gt; 0.999). PaCO₂ reduction was greater in patients with higher respiratory system elastance.</p> Conclusions <p>In sedated, mechanically ventilated patients with COPD, a strategy using high inspiratory flow with a short inspiratory pause reduces PaCO₂ and improves oxygenation without increasing auto-PEEP.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

End-inspiratory pause enhances ventilation efficiency without increasing autoPEEP in patients with COPD during controlled ventilation

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月10日

查看全文
  • Joaquin Pérez,
  • Javier H. Dorado,
  • Ramiro Bragagnolo,
  • Ana Rivera,
  • Matias Accoce,
  • Laurent Brochard

摘要

Introduction

End-inspiratory pause (EIP) is traditionally discouraged in mechanically ventilated patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) because it shortens expiratory time (TE) and may worsen hyperinflation. Previous data in hypoxemic patients suggest that, at equal total inspiratory time (TI), shorter insufflations followed by EIP can improve CO₂ elimination. Whether this strategy is effective and safe in obstructive lung disease remains unknown.

Objective

To evaluate whether a ventilation with high inspiratory flow and EIP reduces arterial carbon dioxide (PaCO₂) without increasing hyperinflation in mechanically ventilated patients with COPD undergoing controlled hypoventilation.

Methods

Prospective, single-center, randomized, cross-over physiological study including sedated, intubated adult patients with acute exacerbation of COPD, PaCO₂ ≥45 mmHg, and no spontaneous respiratory effort. Patients were randomized to two 30-minute ventilation strategies in volume-controlled mode: conventional ventilation without EIP (VentNO−PAUSE) and ventilation with EIP (VentPAUSE), in which inspiratory flow was increased and 40–50% of TI was replaced by an EIP. Total TI and TE were identical in both strategies. Arterial blood gases, respiratory mechanics, and hemodynamics were recorded.

Results

VentPAUSE significantly reduced PaCO₂ (58.5 ± 9.4 to 52.6 ± 10.4 mmHg; P < 0.001) and increased arterial pH (7.31 ± 0.09 to 7.34 ± 0.08; P < 0.001). Ventilatory ratio decreased (P < 0.001), indicating improved ventilatory efficiency. Oxygenation improved (PaO₂ and PaO₂/FiO₂; P < 0.05), while the alveolar–to–arterial oxygen difference was unchanged (p = 0.813). Total PEEP and auto-PEEP were not affected (P > 0.999). PaCO₂ reduction was greater in patients with higher respiratory system elastance.

Conclusions

In sedated, mechanically ventilated patients with COPD, a strategy using high inspiratory flow with a short inspiratory pause reduces PaCO₂ and improves oxygenation without increasing auto-PEEP.