Prone position and positive end-expiratory pressure in acute respiratory distress syndrome*

2003 ◽  
Vol 31 (12) ◽  
pp. 2719-2726 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc Gainnier ◽  
Pierre Michelet ◽  
Xavier Thirion ◽  
Jean-Michel Arnal ◽  
Jean-Marie Sainty ◽  
...  
Critical Care ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
François Perier ◽  
Samuel Tuffet ◽  
Tommaso Maraffi ◽  
Glasiele Alcala ◽  
Marcus Victor ◽  
...  

Abstract Rationale Patients with coronavirus disease-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (C-ARDS) could have a specific physiological phenotype as compared with those affected by ARDS from other causes (NC-ARDS). Objectives To describe the effect of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) on respiratory mechanics in C-ARDS patients in supine and prone position, and as compared to NC-ARDS. The primary endpoint was the best PEEP defined as the smallest sum of hyperdistension and collapse. Methods Seventeen patients with moderate-to-severe C-ARDS were monitored by electrical impedance tomography (EIT) and evaluated during PEEP titration in supine (n = 17) and prone (n = 14) position and compared with 13 NC-ARDS patients investigated by EIT in our department before the COVID-19 pandemic. Results As compared with NC-ARDS, C-ARDS exhibited a higher median best PEEP (defined using EIT as the smallest sum of hyperdistension and collapse, 12 [9, 12] vs. 9 [6, 9] cmH2O, p < 0.01), more collapse at low PEEP, and less hyperdistension at high PEEP. The median value of the best PEEP was similar in C-ARDS in supine and prone position: 12 [9, 12] vs. 12 [10, 15] cmH2O, p = 0.59. The response to PEEP was also similar in C-ARDS patients with higher vs. lower respiratory system compliance. Conclusion An intermediate PEEP level seems appropriate in half of our C-ARDS patients. There is no solid evidence that compliance at low PEEP could predict the response to PEEP.


2020 ◽  
Vol 128 (6) ◽  
pp. 1617-1625 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Terzi ◽  
S. Bayat ◽  
N. Noury ◽  
E. Turbil ◽  
W. Habre ◽  
...  

In a porcine model of acute respiratory distress syndrome, we found that static end-expiratory esophageal pressure did not change significantly in prone position compared with supine position at any positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) tested between 5 and 20 cmH2O. Prone position was associated with an increased ventral pleural pressure and reduced end-expiratory dorsal-to-ventral pleural pressure (Ppl) vertical gradient, likely due to a more even distribution of mechanical forces over the chest wall.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document