A comparison of synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation and pressure-regulated volume control ventilation in elderly patients with acute exacerbations of COPD and respiratory failure
Authors Chang SC, Shi JD, Fu CP, Wu X, Li S
Received 26 October 2015
Accepted for publication 7 March 2016
Published 17 May 2016 Volume 2016:11(1) Pages 1023—1029
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single-blind
Peer reviewers approved by Professor Hsiao-Chi Chuang
Peer reviewer comments 3
Editor who approved publication: Dr Richard Russell
Suchi Chang,1 Jindong Shi,2 Cuiping Fu,1 Xu Wu,1 Shanqun Li1
1Department of Respiratory Medicine, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, 2Department of Respiratory Medicine, The Fifth People’s Hospital of Shanghai, Fudan University, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China
Background: COPD is the third leading cause of death worldwide. Acute exacerbations of COPD may cause respiratory failure, requiring intensive care unit admission and mechanical ventilation. Intensive care unit patients with acute exacerbations of COPD requiring mechanical ventilation have higher mortality rates than other hospitalized patients. Although mechanical ventilation is the most effective intervention for these conditions, invasive ventilation techniques have yielded variable effects.
Objective: We evaluated pressure-regulated volume control (PRVC) ventilation treatment efficacy and preventive effects on pulmonary barotrauma in elderly COPD patients with respiratory failure.
Patients and methods: Thirty-nine intubated patients were divided into experimental and control groups and treated with the PRVC and synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation – volume control methods, respectively. Vital signs, respiratory mechanics, and arterial blood gas analyses were monitored for 2–4 hours and 48 hours.
Results: Both groups showed rapidly improved pH, partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), and PaO2 per fraction of inspired O2 levels and lower partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2) levels. The pH and PaCO2 levels at 2–4 hours were lower and higher, respectively, in the test group than those in the control group (P<0.05 for both); after 48 hours, blood gas analyses showed no statistical difference in any marker (P>0.05). Vital signs during 2–4 hours and 48 hours of treatment showed no statistical difference in either group (P>0.05). The level of peak inspiratory pressure in the experimental group after mechanical ventilation for 2–4 hours and 48 hours was significantly lower than that in the control group (P<0.05), while other variables were not significantly different between groups (P>0.05).
Conclusion: Among elderly COPD patients with respiratory failure, application of PRVC resulted in rapid improvement in arterial blood gas analyses while maintaining a low peak inspiratory pressure. PRVC can reduce pulmonary barotrauma risk, making it a safer protective ventilation mode than synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation – volume control.
Keywords: COPD, respiratory failure, invasive mechanical ventilation, pressure-regulated volume control, synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]