Published in

BioMed Central, Respiratory Research, 1(21), 2020

DOI: 10.1186/s12931-020-01559-x

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Physiologically variable ventilation reduces regional lung inflammation in a pediatric model of acute respiratory distress syndrome

This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Published version: archiving allowed
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Abstract Background Benefits of variable mechanical ventilation based on the physiological breathing pattern have been observed both in healthy and injured lungs. These benefits have not been characterized in pediatric models and the effect of this ventilation mode on regional distribution of lung inflammation also remains controversial. Here, we compare structural, molecular and functional outcomes reflecting regional inflammation between PVV and conventional pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) in a pediatric model of healthy lungs and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Methods New-Zealand White rabbit pups (n = 36, 670 ± 20 g [half-width 95% confidence interval]), with healthy lungs or after induction of ARDS, were randomized to five hours of mechanical ventilation with PCV or PVV. Regional lung aeration, inflammation and perfusion were assessed using x-ray computed tomography, positron-emission tomography and single-photon emission computed tomography, respectively. Ventilation parameters, blood gases and respiratory tissue elastance were recorded hourly. Results Mechanical ventilation worsened respiratory elastance in healthy and ARDS animals ventilated with PCV (11 ± 8%, 6 ± 3%, p < 0.04), however, this trend was improved by PVV (1 ± 4%, − 6 ± 2%). Animals receiving PVV presented reduced inflammation as assessed by lung normalized [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in healthy (1.49 ± 0.62 standardized uptake value, SUV) and ARDS animals (1.86 ± 0.47 SUV) compared to PCV (2.33 ± 0.775 and 2.28 ± 0.3 SUV, respectively, p < 0.05), particularly in the well and poorly aerated lung zones. No benefit of PVV could be detected on regional blood perfusion or blood gas parameters. Conclusions Variable ventilation based on a physiological respiratory pattern, compared to conventional pressure-controlled ventilation, reduced global and regional inflammation in both healthy and injured lungs of juvenile rabbits.