Key result
The inspiratory phase of manual ventilation significantly increased maximal right ventricular pressure (24.6 vs 20.7 mm Hg, p<0.001) and decreased stroke volume and specific echocardiographic variables compared with the expiratory phase in healthy anesthetized dogs.
Why the study?
The influence of manual ventilation-controlled respiration on right ventricular pressure-volume loop-derived and echocardiographic variables in dogs had not been evaluated.
Does manual ventilation-controlled respiration affect right ventricular pressure-volume loops and echocardiographic variables in healthy anesthetized dogs?
Population
8 healthy, anesthetized Beagles
Comparison
End-inspiratory vs end-expiratory phases of respiration
Design
Prospective experimental study
Authors
Loading...
Respiration during manual ventilation alters select RV pressure-volume and echocardiographic measures in anesthetized dogs; leaves open standardization needs for clinical assessments.
Does manual ventilation-controlled respiration affect right ventricular pressure-volume loops and echocardiographic variables in healthy anesthetized dogs?
Absolute Event Rate: 24.6% vs 20.7%
p-value: p=<0.001
Respiration significantly affects conventional RV echocardiographic variables, but RV global analysis-derived strain and strain rate are less sensitive to respiratory load fluctuations and better reflect intrinsic RV contractility.
Yuchi et al. (2021) studied Healthy (n=8). Inspiratory phase of manual ventilation vs. Expiratory phase of manual ventilation was evaluated on Maximal right ventricular pressure (mm Hg) (p=<0.001). The inspiratory phase of manual ventilation significantly increased maximal right ventricular pressure (24.6 vs 20.7 mm Hg, p<0.001) and decreased stroke volume and specific echocardiographic variables compared with the expiratory phase in healthy anesthetized dogs.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: