Key result
Pressure controlled ventilation induced stronger cardioventilatory phase synchronization than pressure support ventilation in critically ill patients with acute respiratory failure.
Why the study?
Does pressure controlled ventilation compared to pressure support ventilation alter cardioventilatory phase synchronization in critically ill patients with acute respiratory failure?
RCT (n=10)
Random order crossover
Does pressure controlled ventilation compared to pressure support ventilation alter cardioventilatory phase synchronization in critically ill patients with acute respiratory failure?
Mechanical ventilation modes significantly influence cardioventilatory phase synchronization, with pressure controlled ventilation inducing stronger synchronization than pressure support ventilation.
Should not yet change ventilation practices in respiratory failure; leaves open clinical relevance of mode-specific synchronization.
Cardioventilatory phase synchronization was studied in ten critically ill patients admitted in intensive care unit (ICU) for acute respiratory failure under two mechanical ventilatory modes: (i) pressure controlled ventilation (PCV); (ii) pressure support ventilation (PSV). The two modalities were administered to the same patient in different times in a random order. Cardioventilatory phase interactions were typified by plotting the relative position of a heartbeat, detected from the electrocardiogram and collected in n groups, within m ventilatory cycles as a function of the progressive cardiac beat number via the synchrogram. n:m phase synchronized patterns were detected by computing the variability of each phase group. The percent duration of the recording featuring phase synchronization was assessed as a measure of the strength of phase synchrony and tested against situations of full phase desynchronization between cardiac and ventilatory rhythms. Indexes quantifying the variability of the cardiac and ventilatory activities were computed as well. Findings proved that: (i) a significant presence of n:m phase synchronized patterns was detected in PCV; (ii) the strength of n:m phase synchronization was stronger during PCV than PSV; (iii) different strengths of cardioventilatory phase synchronization detected during PCV and PSV were found in presence of similar heart and ventilatory rates and alike variability. We conclude that mechanical ventilation can induce a significant presence of cardioventilatory phase synchronized patterns and this amount depends on the mode of mechanical ventilation. Future studies should test the eventual link of the level of phase coordination between heart and mechanical ventilation to a clinical outcome to understand whether featuring a certain degree of cardioventilatory phase synchronization is beneficial for the critical patient in ICU.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mazzucco et al. (2017) conducted an RCT in Acute respiratory failure (n=10). Pressure controlled ventilation (PCV) vs. Pressure support ventilation (PSV) was evaluated on Percent duration of the recording featuring phase synchronization. Pressure controlled ventilation induced stronger cardioventilatory phase synchronization than pressure support ventilation in critically ill patients with acute respiratory failure.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: