Does the Efficacy of High Intensity Ventilation in Stable COPD Depend on the Ventilator Model? A Bench-to-Bedside Study
Cristina Lalmolda,Pablo Flórez,Marta Corral,Ana Hernández Voth,Carles Grimau,Javier Sayas,Manel Luján,Pablo Flórez Solarana,Marta Corral Blanco
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S327994
2022-01-14
International Journal of COPD
Abstract:Cristina Lalmolda, 1, 2 Pablo Flórez, 1 Marta Corral, 3 Ana Hernández Voth, 3 Carles Grimau, 1 Javier Sayas, 2 Manel Luján 1, 2, 4 1 Pneumology Department, Corporació Sanitària I Universitària Parc Taulí, Sabadell, Barcelona, Spain; 2 CIBERES, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en red, Mallorca, Spain; 3 Pneumology Department, Hospital 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain; 4 Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain Correspondence: Manel Luján Pneumology Department, Corporació Parc Taulí, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Parc Taulí 1, 08208 Sabadell, Campus de la UAB, Plaça Cívica, Bellaterra, 08193, Barcelona, Spain Tel +34937231010 Email Purpose: The European Task Force for chronic non-invasive ventilation in stable COPD recommends the use of high pressure-support (PS) level to maximize the decrease in PaCO2. It is possible that the ventilator model can influence the need for higher or lower pressure levels. Research Question: To determine the differences between ventilators in a bench model with an increased inspiratory demand; and to compare the degree of muscular unloading measured by parasternal electromyogram (EMGpara) provided by the different ventilators in real patients with stable COPD. Patients and Methods: Bench: four levels of increasing progressive effort were programmed. The response of nine ventilators to four levels of PS and EPAP of 5 cm H2O was studied. The pressure-time product was determined at 300 and 500 msec (PTP 300/500). Clinical Study: The ventilators were divided into two groups, based on the result of the bench test. Severe COPD patients with non-invasive ventilation (NIV) were studied, randomly comparing the performance of one ventilator from each group. Muscle unloading was measured by the decrease in EMGpara from its baseline value. Results: There were significant differences in PTP 300 and PTP 500 in the bench study. Based on these results, home ventilators were classified into two groups; group 1 included four models with higher PTP 300. Ten COPD patients were recruited for the clinical study. Group 1 ventilators showed greater muscle unloading at the same PS than group 2. Conclusion: The scale of pressure support in NIV for high intensity ventilation may be influenced by the ventilator model. Clinical Trials.gov: NCT03373175. Keywords: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, parasternal electromyogram, pressure support, pressure-time product, respiratory muscle unloading, rise time Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a disease with high mortality and morbidity in clinical practice. A high percentage of patients with advanced disease develop chronic respiratory failure and require nocturnal non-invasive ventilation (NIV) treatment. In some European countries, COPD is already the leading cause of prescription of home ventilation. 1 The results reported to date in COPD patients undergoing home NIV have been variable. Despite the exponential growth in ventilation prescriptions in stable COPD during the last 15 years, the controlled studies of its use carried out so far have yielded variable results in terms of improved survival, dyspnoea, quality of life or impact on arterial blood gases. 2–4 In recent studies, the time to first exacerbation after starting chronic NIV has been used as a surrogate of efficacy. 5 One of the special features of recent studies is the systematic use of high pressure support values and high backup frequency (respiratory rate) on the ventilator. The goal is to try and normalize PaCO2 or to obtain a decrease of at least 20% from baseline values. This is known as high intensity ventilation. Initially, high-intensity NIV in COPD was used in short-term studies with the evaluation of physiological parameters 6,7 but more recently its use has expanded. In fact, the recent European Task Force recommends its use in COPD patients with stable hypercapnia and in those with persistent hypercapnia at 2–4 weeks after a severe exacerbation and advocates the use of high pressure support levels to try to normalize or significantly decrease PaCO2. 8 These pressure levels, however, are higher than the ones used in clinical practice to treat patients with COPD exacerbations and respiratory acidosis, 9 in which inspiratory pressure does not usually reach 18 cm H2O. One of the primary goals of NIV in stable COPD is to unload the respiratory muscles. 8 One of the factors that might explain these differences is the use of different ventilators in exacerbated patients in hospital an -Abstract Truncated-
English Else