呼吸机自动测量气道阻断压与标准测量方法的一致性

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-7795.2022.05.010

首都医科大学学报 ›› 2022, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (5): 728-733.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-7795.2022.05.010

呼吸机自动测量气道阻断压与标准测量方法的一致性

张琳琳, 田野^*, 苗明月, 段雨晴, 田莹, 周建新

首都医科大学附属北京天坛医院重症医学科,北京 100070

收稿日期:2022-08-08 出版日期:2022-10-21 发布日期:2022-10-25
基金资助:
首都临床诊疗技术研究及转化应用(Z201100005520050)。

Accuracy of automatic measurement of airway occlusion pressure by ventilator: bench and clinical study

Zhang Linlin, Tian Ye^*, Miao Mingyue, Duan Yuqing, Tian Ying, Zhou Jianxin

Department of Intensive Care Unit, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100070, China

Received:2022-08-08 Online:2022-10-21 Published:2022-10-25
Contact: * E-mail: lbjssky@163.com
Supported by:
Capital Research and Translational Application of Clinical Diagnosis and Treatment Technology(Z201100005520050).

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的验证呼吸机自动测量的气道阻断压(airway occlusion pressure,P0.1)与标准测量方法的一致性,以及不同触发形式对自动测量结果的影响。方法选择采用非阻断自动测量P0.1的呼吸机,分别进行模拟肺和临床试验。调节全自动自主呼吸模拟肺,模拟具有不同呼吸努力和呼吸力学特征的48种状态,应用待检测呼吸机,以压力支持通气模式为模拟肺进行通气。临床研究部分纳入15例接受压力支持通气的成年患者。两部分研究均随机交叉应用压力和流量触发,采集呼吸机自动监测的P0.1后,采用标准呼气末气道阻断法进行P0.1测量,作为标准参考值。采用Bland-Altman检验分析P0.1呼吸机监测值与标准参考值的一致性,计算残差(呼吸机监测值-标准参考值)和95%一致性区间,比较不同触发形式对残差的影响。结果在模拟肺验证中,P0.1呼吸机监测值与标准参考值之间的残差(95%一致性区间)在压力和流量触发下分别为0.04(－0.63~0.70)和－0.54(－1.44~0.36)cmH₂O(1 cmH₂O=0.098 kPa),两者相比差异具有统计学意义(P<0.001)。临床观察获得了相似的结果,压力和流量触发时的残差(95%一致性区间)分别为－0.11(－0.73~0.52)和－0.54(－1.50~0.59)cmH₂O,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),表明呼吸机监测值与标准参考值间存在一致性。结论压力触发时,呼吸机非阻断法自动测量的P0.1与标准方法具有良好的一致性。而流量触发明显低估P0.1,建议自动监测时切换到压力触发。

关键词: 机械通气, 自主呼吸, 呼吸努力, 气道阻断压, 呼吸机

Abstract: Objective To investigate the agreement of the airway occlusion pressure (P0.1) measured automatically by the ventilator with the standard measurement method, and the influence of different types of trigger on the automatic measurement. Methods Ventilator with automatic measurement of P0.1 using the unoccluded fitting method was selected. Bench and clinical studies were conducted in a lung simulator and mechanically ventilated patients. A total of 48 conditions were adjusted to simulate different statuses of respiratory effort and mechanics. The tested ventilator was used to deliver the pressure support ventilation to the simulator. The clinical study included 15 adult patients undergoing pressure support ventilation. In both bench and clinical studies, the pressure and flow trigger were used as random crossover. After collecting the P0.1 automatically monitored by the ventilator, the standard end-expiratory airway occlusion was performed to measure the P0.1 as the standard reference value. The Bland-Altman test was used to analyze the agreement between the ventilator monitoring value and the standard reference value, and the bias (ventilator monitoring value-standard reference value) and 95% limit of agreement were calculated. Bias in P0.1 measurement of the two triggering methods was compared. Results In the simulated lung validation, the bias (95% limit of agreement) in P0.1 measurement during pressure and flow trigger was 0.04 (－0.63-0.70) and －0.54 ( －1.44－0.36) cmH₂O, respectively, which was statistically significant (P<0.001). Similar results were obtained in clinical studies, with the bias (95% limit of agreement) at pressure and flow triggering of －0.11 (－0.73-0.52) and －0.54 (－1.50-0.59) cmH₂O, respectively, which was also statistically significant. Conclusion During pressure trigger, an excellent agreement was found in P0.1 measured by the ventilator the standard method. However, the ventilator measurement significantly underestimates P0.1 during flow trigger. It is recommended to switch to pressure trigger during automatic monitoring of P0.1 by ventilator.

Key words: mechanical ventilation, spontaneous breathing, respiratory effort, airway occlusion pressure, ventilator

中图分类号:

张琳琳, 田野, 苗明月, 段雨晴, 田莹, 周建新. 呼吸机自动测量气道阻断压与标准测量方法的一致性[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2022, 43(5): 728-733.

Zhang Linlin, Tian Ye, Miao Mingyue, Duan Yuqing, Tian Ying, Zhou Jianxin. Accuracy of automatic measurement of airway occlusion pressure by ventilator: bench and clinical study[J]. Journal of Capital Medical University, 2022, 43(5): 728-733.

参考文献

[1] Dellaca' R L, Veneroni C, Farre' R. Trends in mechanical ventilation: are we ventilating our patients in the best possible way?[J]. Breathe (Sheff), 2017, 13(2): 84-98.
[2] Mauri T, Cambiaghi B, Spinelli E, et al. Spontaneous breathing: a double-edged sword to handle with care[J]. Ann Transl Med, 2017, 5(14): 292.
[3] Yoshida T, Fujino Y J, Amato M B P, et al. Fifty years of research in ARDS. spontaneous breathing during mechanical ventilation. risks, mechanisms, and management[J]. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2017, 195(8): 985-992.
[4] Telias I, Spadaro S. Techniques to monitor respiratory drive and inspiratory effort[J]. Curr Opin Crit Care, 2020, 26(1): 3-10.
[5] Bertoni M, Spadaro S, Goligher E C. Monitoring patient respiratory effort during mechanical ventilation: lung and diaphragm-protective ventilation[J]. Crit Care, 2020, 24(1): 106.
[6] Mauri T, Yoshida T, Bellani G, et al. Esophageal and transpulmonary pressure in the clinical setting: meaning, usefulness and perspectives[J]. Intensive Care Med, 2016, 42(9): 1360-1373.
[7] Brochard L. Measurement of esophageal pressure at bedside: pros and cons[J]. Curr Opin Crit Care, 2014, 20(1): 39-46.
[8] Telias I, Damiani F, Brochard L. The airway occlusion pressure (P0.1) to monitor respiratory drive during mechanical ventilation: increasing awareness of a not-so-new problem[J]. Intensive Care Med, 2018, 44(9): 1532-1535.
[9] Telias I, Junhasavasdikul D, Rittayamai N, et al. Airway occlusion pressure as an estimate of respiratory drive and inspiratory effort during assisted ventilation[J]. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2020, 201(9): 1086-1098.
[10] Yang Y L, He X, Sun X M, et al. Optimal esophageal balloon volume for accurate estimation of pleural pressure at end-expiration and end-inspiration: an in vitro bench experiment[J]. Intensive Care Med Exp, 2017, 5(1): 35.
[11] Brochard L J, Lellouche F. Pressure-support ventilation[M]//Tobin M J. Principles and Practice of Mechanical Ventilation. 3rd ed. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2013: 199-227.
[12] Goligher E C, Jonkman A H, Dianti J, et al. Clinical strategies for implementing lung and diaphragm-protective ventilation: avoiding insufficient and excessive effort[J]. Intensive Care Med, 2020, 46(12): 2314-2326.
[13] de Vries H, Jonkman A, Shi Z H. Assessing breathing effort in mechanical ventilation: physiology and clinical implications[J]. Ann Transl Med, 2018, 619: 387.
[14] Beloncle F, Piquilloud L, Olivier P Y, et al. Accuracy of P_0.1 measurements performed by ICU ventilators: a bench study[J]. Ann Intensive Care, 2019, 9(1): 104.
[15] Ferreira J C, Chipman D W, Kacmarek R M. Trigger performance of mid-level ICU mechanical ventilators during assisted ventilation: a bench study[J]. Intensive Care Med, 2008, 34(9): 1669-1675.
[16] Lyazidi A, Thille A W, Carteaux G, et al. Bench test evaluation of volume delivered by modern ICU ventilators during volume-controlled ventilation[J]. Intensive Care Med, 2010, 36(12): 2074-2080.

呼吸机自动测量气道阻断压与标准测量方法的一致性

Accuracy of automatic measurement of airway occlusion pressure by ventilator: bench and clinical study

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 10

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	周益民, 宁泽惺, 罗旭颖, 何璇, 杨燕琳, 陈光强, 李瑞瑞, 周建新. 基于半监督卷积神经网络进行人机不同步的识别[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2022, 43(5): 734-739.
[2]	程卫, 隆云. 膈肌保护性通气的概念及进展[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2022, 43(5): 740-746.
[3]	朱波, 李志强, 席修明. 智能脱机模式对机械通气时间影响的系统评价[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2013, 34(2): 191-200.
[4]	秦志强;王辰;庞宝森;孙兵;杜敏捷;牛淑杰;龙胜泽. 机械通气对急性肺损伤兔肺水肿影响的实验研究[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2007, 28(5): 575-578.
[5]	朱光发. 无创通气治疗呼吸衰竭的研究进展[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2007, 28(1): 47-51.
[6]	张隽;王辰;庞宝森;秦志强;牛淑洁;马力;毛燕玲. 呼吸机所致肺损伤肿瘤坏死因子-α的表达及核因子-κB活性的实验研究[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2006, 27(1): 9-13.
[7]	王克杰;王力红;魏嘉平;杨强;贾强;冯明;聂秀红;李坤成;尹建国;王立;续大田;张泰昌;王育琴. 机械通气在SARS治疗中的应用[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2003, 24(4): 410-413.
[8]	杨强;肖汉;张连国;王烁;聂秀红. 8例严重急性呼吸综合征患者有创机械通气治疗总结[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2003, 24(4): 422-425.
[9]	杨磊;李非;李铎;贾建国;杨鹏;孙家邦. SARS危重患者机械通气后并发症的临床分析及呼吸治疗策略的探讨[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2003, 24(4): 426-429.
[10]	杨建国;汪俊韬;林秀玉. 56例极重型乙脑患者应用人工呼吸器治疗的并发症和死亡原因分析[J]. 首都医科大学学报, 2001, 22(3): 241-243.