Article

Airway pressure release ventilation: what do we know?

Respiratory Institute, The Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Respiratory care (Impact Factor: 2.03). 07/2011; 57(2):282-92. DOI: 10.4187/respcare.01238
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) is inverse ratio, pressure controlled, intermittent mandatory ventilation with unrestricted spontaneous breathing. It is based on the principle of open lung approach. It has many purported advantages over conventional ventilation, including alveolar recruitment, improved oxygenation, preservation of spontaneous breathing, improved hemodynamics, and potential lung-protective effects. It has many claimed disadvantages related to risks of volutrauma, increased work of breathing, and increased energy expenditure related to spontaneous breathing. APRV is used mainly as a rescue therapy for the difficult to oxygenate patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). There is confusion regarding this mode of ventilation, due to the different terminology used in the literature. APRV settings include the "P high," "T high," "P low," and "T low". Physicians and respiratory therapists should be aware of the different ways and the rationales for setting these variables on the ventilators. Also, they should be familiar with the differences between APRV, biphasic positive airway pressure (BIPAP), and other conventional and nonconventional modes of ventilation. There is no solid proof that APRV improves mortality; however, there are ongoing studies that may reveal further information about this mode of ventilation. This paper reviews the different methods proposed for APRV settings, and summarizes the different studies comparing APRV and BIPAP, and the potential benefits and pitfalls for APRV.

3 Bookmarks
 · 
314 Views
  • Shock (Augusta, Ga.) 09/2013; 40(3):163-5. · 2.87 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Pressure preset ventilation (PPV) modes with set inspiratory time can be classified according to their ability to synchronize pressure delivery with patient's inspiratory efforts (i-synchronization). Non-i-synchronized (like airway pressure release ventilation, APRV), partially i-synchronized (like biphasic airway pressure), and fully i-synchronized modes (like assist-pressure control) can be distinguished. Under identical ventilatory settings across PPV modes, the degree of i-synchronization may affect tidal volume (V T), transpulmonary pressure (P TP), and their variability. We performed bench and clinical studies. In the bench study, all the PPV modes of five ventilators were tested with an active lung simulator. Spontaneous efforts of -10 cmH2O at rates of 20 and 30 breaths/min were simulated. Ventilator settings were high pressure 30 cmH2O, positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) 15 cmH2O, frequency 15 breaths/min, and inspiratory to expiratory ratios (I:E) 1:3 and 3:1. In the clinical studies, data from eight intubated patients suffering from acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and ventilated with APRV were compared to the bench tests. In four additional ARDS patients, each of the PPV modes was compared. As the degree of i-synchronization among the different PPV modes increased, mean V T and P TP swings markedly increased while breathing variability decreased. This was consistent with clinical comparison in four ARDS patients. Observational results in eight ARDS patients show low V T and a high variability with APRV. Despite identical ventilator settings, the different PPV modes lead to substantial differences in V T, P TP, and breathing variability in the presence spontaneous efforts. Clinicians should be aware of the possible harmful effects of i-synchronization especially when high V T is undesirable.
    European Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 08/2013; · 5.17 Impact Factor
  • Pediatric Critical Care Medicine 05/2014; 15(4):379-80. · 2.35 Impact Factor

Full-text

View
96 Downloads
Available from
Jun 1, 2014