• Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases
• /
• v.46 no.5
• /
• pp.662-673
• /
• 1999

Background : Pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) is frequently used recently as the initial mode of mechanical ventilation in the patients with respiratory failure. Theoretically, because of its high initial inspiratory flow, pressure-controlled ventilation has lower peak inspiratory pressure and improved gas exchange than volume-controlled ventilation (VCV). But the data from previous studies showed controversial results about the gas exchange. Moreover, the comparison study between PCV and VCV with various inspiration : expiration time ratios (I : E ratios) is rare. So this study was performed to compare the respiratory mechanics and gas exchange between PCV and VCV with various I : E raitos. Methods : Nine patients receiving mechanical ventilation for respiratory failure were enrolled. They were ventilated by both PCV and VCV with various I : E ratios (1 : 2, 1 : 1.3 and 1.7 : 1). $FiO_2$, tidal volume, respiratory rate and external positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) were kept constant throughout the study. After 20 minutes of each ventilation mode, arterial blood gas, airway pressures, expired $CO_2$ were measured. Results : In both PCV and VCV, as the I : E ratio increased, the mean airway pressure was increased, and $PaCO_2$ and physiologic dead space fraction were decreased. But P(A-a)$O_2$ was not changed. In all three different I : E ratios, peak inspiratory pressure was lower during PCV, and mean airway pressure was higher during PCV. But $PaCO_2$ level, physiologic dead space fraction and P(A-a)$O_2$ were not different between PCV and VCV with three different I : E ratios. Conclusion : There was no difference in gas exchange between PCV and VCV under the same tidal volume, frequency and I : E ratio.

• Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases
• /
• v.46 no.6
• /
• pp.803-810
• /
• 1999

Background : The patient's work of breathing(WOBp) during assisted ventilation may vary according to many factors including ventilatory demand of the patients and applied ventilatory setting by the physician. Pressure-controlled ventilation(PCV) which delivers gas with decelerating flow may better meet patients' demand to improve patient-ventilator synchrony compared with volume-controlled ventilation(VCV) with constant flow. This study was conducted to compare the difference in WOBp in two assisted modes of ventilation, PCV and VCV with constant flow. Methods : Ten patients with respiratory failure were included in this study. Initially, the patients were placed on VCV with constant flow at low tidal volume($V_{T,\;LOW}$)(6-8 ml/kg) or high tidal volume($V_{T,\;HIGH}$)(10-12 ml/kg). After a 15 minute stabilization period, VCV with constant flow was switched to PCV and pressure was adjusted to maintain the same tidal volume($V_T$) received on VCV. Other ventilator settings were kept constant. Before changing the ventilatory mode, WOBp, $V_T$, minute ventilation($V_E$), respiratory rate(RR), peak airway pressure (Ppeak), peak inspiratory flow rate(PIFR) and pressure-time product(PTP) were measured. Results : The mean $V_E$ and RR were not different between PCV and VCV during the study period. The Ppeak was significantly lower in PCV than in VCV during $V_{T,\;HIGH}$. HIGH ventilation(p<0.05). PIFR was significantly higher in PCV than in VCV at both $V_T$ (p<0.05). During $V_{T,\;LOW}$ ventilation, WOBp and PTP in PCV($0.80{\pm}0.37\;J/min$, $164.5{\pm}74.4\;cmH_2O.S$) were significantly lower than in VCV($1.06{\pm}0.39J/mm$, $256.4{\pm}107.5\;cmH_2O.S$)(p<0.05). During $V_{T,\;HIGH}$ ventilation, WOBp and PTP in PCV($0.33{\pm}0.14\;J/min$, $65.7{\pm}26.3\;cmH_2O.S$) were also significantly lower than in VCV($0.40{\pm}0.14\;J/min$, $83.4{\pm}35.1\;cmH_2O.S$)(p<0.05). Conclusion : During assisted ventilation, PCV with decelerating flow was more effective in reducing WOBp than VCV with constant flow. But since individual variability was shown, further studies are needed to confirm these results.

• Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases
• /
• v.44 no.6
• /
• pp.1318-1325
• /
• 1997

Background : Since the late 1960s, mechanical ventilation has been accomplished primarily using volume controlled ventilation(VCV). While VCV allows a set tidal volume to be guaranteed, VCV could bring about excessive airway pressures that may be lead to barotrauma in the patients with acute lung injury. With the increment of knowledge related to ventilator-induced lung injury, pressure controlled ventilation(PCV) has been frequently applied to these patients. But, PCV has a disadvantage of variable tidal volume delivery as pulmonary impedance changes. Since the concept of combining the positive attributes of VCV and PCV(dual control ventilation, DCV) was described firstly in 1992, a few DCV modes were introduced. Pressure-regulated volume control(PRVC) mode, a kind of DCV, is pressure-limited, time-cycled ventilation that uses tidal volume as a feedback control for continuously adjusting the pressure limit However, no clinical studies were published on the efficacy of PRVC until now. 'This investigation studied the efficacy of PRVC in the patients with unstable respiratory mechanics. Methods : The subjects were 8 mechanically ventilated patients(M : F=6 : 2, $56{\pm}26$ years) who showed unstable respiratory mechanics, which was defined by the coefficients of variation of peak inspiratory pressure for 15 minutes greater than 10% under VCV, or the coefficients of variation of tidal volume greater than 10% under PCV. The study was consisited of 3 modes application with VCV, PCV and PRVC for 15 minutes by random order. To obtain same tidal volume, inspiratory pressure setting was adjusted in PCV. Respiratory parameters were measured by pulmonary monitor(CP-100 pulmonary monitor, Bicore, Irvine, CA, USA). Results : 1) Mean tidal volumes($V_T$) in each mode were not different(VCV, $431{\pm}102ml$ ; PCV, $417{\pm}99ml$ ; PRVC, $414{\pm}97ml$) 2) The coefficient of variation(CV) of $V_T$ were $5.2{\pm}3.9%$ in VCV, $15.2{\pm}7.5%$ in PCV and $19.3{\pm}10.0%$ in PRVC. The CV of $V_T$ in PCV and PRVC were significantly greater than that in VCV(p<0.01). 3) Mean peak inspiratory pressure(PIP) in VCV($31.0{\pm}6.9cm$ $H_2O$) was higher than PIP in PCV($26.0{\pm}6.5cm$ $H_2O$) or PRVC($27.0{\pm}6.4cm$ $H_2O$)(p<0.05). 4) The CV of PIP were $13.9{\pm}3.7%$ in VCV, $4.9{\pm}2.6%$ in PVC and $12.2{\pm}7.0%$ in PRVC. The CV of PIP in VCV and PRVC were greater than that in PCV(p<0.01). Conclusions : Because of wide fluctuations of VT and PIP, PRVC mode did not seem to have advantages compared to VCV or PCV in the patients with unstable respiratory mechanics.

• Journal of Yeungnam Medical Science
• /
• v.35 no.2
• /
• pp.165-170
• /
• 2018

Background: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether tidal volume (TV) of 8 mL/kg without positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and TV of 6 mL/kg with or without PEEP in pressure-controlled ventilation-volume guaranteed (PCV-VG) mode can maintain arterial oxygenation and decrease inspiratory airway pressure effectively during one-lung ventilation (OLV). Methods: The study enrolled 27 patients undergoing thoracic surgery. All patients were ventilated with PCV-VG mode. During OLV, patients were initially ventilated with TV 8 mL/kg (group TV8) without PEEP. Ventilation was subsequently changed to TV 6 mL/kg with PEEP ($5cmH_2O$; group TV6+PEEP) or without (group TV6) in random sequence. Peak inspiratory pressure ($P_{peak}$), mean airway pressure ($P_{mean}$), and arterial blood gas analysis were measured 30 min after changing ventilator settings. Ventilation was then changed once more to add or eliminate PEEP ($5cmH_2O$), while maintaining TV 6 mL/kg. Thirty min after changing ventilator settings, the same parameters were measured once more. Results: The $P_{peak}$ was significantly lower in group TV6 ($19.3{\pm}3.3cmH_2O$) than in group TV8 ($21.8{\pm}3.1cmH_2O$) and group TV6+PEEP ($20.1{\pm}3.4cmH_2O$). $PaO_2$ was significantly higher in group TV8 ($242.5{\pm}111.4mmHg$) than in group TV6 ($202.1{\pm}101.3mmHg$) (p=0.044). There was no significant difference in $PaO_2$ between group TV8 and group TV6+PEEP ($226.8{\pm}121.1mmHg$). However, three patients in group TV6 were dropped from the study because $PaO_2$ was lower than 80 mmHg after ventilation. Conclusion: It is postulated that TV 8 mL/kg without PEEP or TV 6 mL/kg with $5cmH_2O$ PEEP in PCV-VG mode during OLV can safely maintain adequate oxygenation.

• Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases
• /
• v.63 no.5
• /
• pp.423-429
• /
• 2007

Background: Alveolar recruitment (RM) is one of the primary goals of respiratory care for an acute lung injury (ALI) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The purposes of alveolar recruitment are an improvement in pulmonary gas exchange and the protection of atelectrauma. This study examined the effect and safety of the alveolar RM using pressure control ventilation (PCV) in early ALI and ARDS patients. Methods: Sixteen patients with early ALI and ARDS who underwent alveolar RM using PCV were enrolled in this study. The patients data were recorded at the baseline, and 20 minutes, and 60 minutes after alveolar RM, and on the next day after the maneuver. Alveolar RM was performed with an inspiratory pressure of $30cmH_2O$ and a PEEP of $20cmH_2O$ in a 2-minute PCV mode. The venous $O_2$ saturation, central venous pressure, blood pressure, pulse rate, $PaO_2/FiO_2$ ratio, PEEP, and chest X-ray findings were obtained before and after alveolar RM. Results: Of the 16 patients, 3 had extra-pulmonary ALI/ARDS and the remaining 13 had pulmonary ALI/ARDS. The mean PEEP was 11.3 mmHg, and the mean $PaO_2/FiO_2$ ratio was 130.3 before RM. The $PaO_2/FiO_2$ ratio increased by 45% after alveolar RM. The $PaO_2/FiO_2$ ratio reached a peak 60 minutes after alveolar RM. The Pa$CO_2$ increased by 51.9 mmHg after alveolar RM. The mean blood pressure was not affected by alveolar RM. There were no complications due to pressure injuries such as a pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum, and subcutaneous emphysema. Conclusion: In this study, alveolar RM using PCV improved the level of oxygenation in patients with an acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Moreover, there were no significant complications due to hemodynamic changes and pressure injuries. Therefore, alveolar RM using PCV can be applied easily and safely in clinical practice with lung protective strategy in early ALI and ARDS patients.