98%
921
2 minutes
20
Mechanically ventilated patients periodically require endotracheal suctioning. There are conflicting data regarding the loss of lung gas volume caused by the application of a negative pressure by closed-circuit suctioning. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of suctioning performed by a closed-circuit system in ARDS patients during volume- or pressure-controlled ventilation. In this prospective crossover-design study, 18 ARDS patients were ventilated under volume and pressure control applied in random order. Gas exchange, respiratory mechanics and EIT-derived end-expiratory lung volume (EELV) before the suctioning manoeuvre and after 5, 15 and 30 min were recorded. The tidal volume and respiratory rate were similar in both ventilation modes; in volume control, the EELV decreased by 31 ± 23 mL, 5 min after the suctioning, but it remained similar after 15 and 30 min; the oxygenation, PaCO and respiratory system elastance did not change. In the pressure control, 5 min after suctioning, EELV decreased by 35 (26-46) mL, the PaO/FiO did not change, while PaCO increased by 5 and 30 min after suctioning (45 (40-51) vs. 48 (43-52) and 47 (42-54) mmHg, respectively). Our results suggest minimal clinical advantages when a closed system is used in volume-controlled compared to pressure-controlled ventilation.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8658121 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10235657 | DOI Listing |
Minerva Anestesiol
August 2025
Lianyungang Clinical College of Nanjing Medical University, Lianyungang, Jiangsu, China -
Background: The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of permissive hypercapnia on regional cerebral oxygen saturation (rScO
Methods: In this randomized controlled trial, 83 patients undergoing elective laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy were randomly divided into two groups. Respiratory parameters were adjusted to achieve the target PaCO
Medicine (Baltimore)
August 2025
Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Background: There is limited data on the effectiveness of pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) and volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) in adult patients with acute respiratory failure. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of these 2 ventilations.
Methods: We performed a comprehensive search of 4 electronic databases, including PubMed, Central, Scopus, and CINAHL, from inception to July 14, 2023.
Respir Care
August 2025
Department of Anesthesiology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
The airway pressure release ventilation (APRV)-based time controlled adaptive ventilation (TCAV) protocol can potentially minimize ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI). Inspiratory pressure rise time (IPRT) is a parameter available in pressure-controlled ventilation modes, yet its role within TCAV remains unclear. We hypothesized that varying IPRTs impact lung emptying and associated ventilatory parameters (driving pressure [ΔP], intrinsic PEEP [PEEPi], exhaled tidal volume [V]).
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJSLS
August 2025
Department of Anesthesiology, General Hospital of Yangquan Coal Industry Group, Yangquan City, 045008, Shanxi Province, China.
Objective: This study aimed to investigate the effects of the pressure-controlled volume-guaranteed ventilation (PCV-VG) mode on pulmonary function in patients with pneumoconiosis undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Methods: Forty patients with pneumoconiosis scheduled for elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anesthesia were randomly divided into two groups using a random number table method: the PCV-VG mode group and the volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) mode group. The primary outcome was lung ultrasound score (LUS) after entering the operating room (T0), at the end of surgery (T3), 30 minutes after tracheal extubation (T4), and 2 hours postoperatively (T5).
PLoS One
August 2025
Department of Anaesthesiology, University Medical Center, Georg-August-University, Göttingen, Germany.
Background: The concept of ventilating multiple patients concurrently using a single ventilator has been proposed as a solution when the demand for ventilators surpasses the available supply. While the practicality of this approach has been established, a thorough evaluation of the risks involved has yet to be comprehensively addressed.
Methods: Two circuits, a simple one (circuit-1) and another with an adjustable resistance valve (circuit-2), were evaluated within an experimental framework utilizing two computer-controlled lung simulators (TestChest and ASL 5000).