Open Access

Experimental study of airway pressure release ventilation in the treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome

  • Authors:
    • Guan-Jie Han
    • Jia-Qiong Li
    • Cui-Gai Pan
    • Jing-Xi Sun
    • Zai-Xiang Shi
    • Ji-Yuan Xu
    • Mao-Qin Li
  • View Affiliations

  • Published online on: July 6, 2017     https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2017.4718
  • Pages: 1941-1946
  • Copyright: © Han et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )


Abstract

Airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) is a ventilator mode which has demonstrated potential benefits in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients. We therefore sought to compare relevant pulmonary data and safety outcomes of this mode to the conventional ventilation and sustained inflation. Canines admitted after intravenous injection of oleic acid requiring mechanical ventilation were randomly divided into 3 groups (n=6), namely conventional ventilation group, low tidal volume ventilation with recruitment group (LTV+SI) and APRV group. The changes of oxygenation, ventilation, airway pressure, inflammatory reaction and hemodynamics at the basic state were observed at 0, 1, 2 and 4 h during the experiment. The levels of PaO2/FiO2 in APRV group were higher than LTV+SI group at 2 and 4 h (P<0.05). In APRV group, the PCO2 levels at 1, 2 and 4 h is much lower than LTV+SI group (P<0.05). Outcome variables showed no differences between APRV, LVT+SI and conventional mechanical ventilation for plateau airway pressure (24±1 vs. 29±3 vs. 25±4), mean arterial pressure (92.9±16.5 vs. 85.8±21.4 vs. 88.7±24.4), cardiac index (4.3±1.7 vs. 3.5±1.9 vs. 3.4±2.1), ERO2 (13.4±10.3 vs. 16.1±6.8 vs. 17.6±9.1), lac (2.5±1.7 vs. 3.1±1.6 vs. 3.9±1.9), tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α (132±11 vs. 140±6 vs. 195±13) and matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)-9. For canines sustaining acute respiratory distress syndrome requiring mechanical ventilation, APRV can significantly improve oxygenation and keep hemodynamic stability compared with LTV+SI. The results of TNF-α and MMP-9 suggest that APRV could be as protective for ARDS as LTV with recruitment group.

Related Articles

Journal Cover

September-2017
Volume 14 Issue 3

Print ISSN: 1792-0981
Online ISSN:1792-1015

Sign up for eToc alerts

Recommend to Library

Copy and paste a formatted citation
x
Spandidos Publications style
Han G, Li J, Pan C, Sun J, Shi Z, Xu J and Li M: Experimental study of airway pressure release ventilation in the treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome. Exp Ther Med 14: 1941-1946, 2017.
APA
Han, G., Li, J., Pan, C., Sun, J., Shi, Z., Xu, J., & Li, M. (2017). Experimental study of airway pressure release ventilation in the treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome. Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine, 14, 1941-1946. https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2017.4718
MLA
Han, G., Li, J., Pan, C., Sun, J., Shi, Z., Xu, J., Li, M."Experimental study of airway pressure release ventilation in the treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome". Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine 14.3 (2017): 1941-1946.
Chicago
Han, G., Li, J., Pan, C., Sun, J., Shi, Z., Xu, J., Li, M."Experimental study of airway pressure release ventilation in the treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome". Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine 14, no. 3 (2017): 1941-1946. https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2017.4718