Improved ventilatory function in burn patients using volumetric diffusive respiration

D. A. Rodeberg, T. A. Housinger, David G Greenhalgh, N. E. Maschinot, G. D. Warden

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

34 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Volumetric diffusive respiration (VDR) offers theoretical advantages over conventional mechanical ventilation (CV) by using lower airway pressures, recruiting alveoli, and mobilizing secretions. STUDY DESIGN: Forty-eight thermally injured pediatric patients with failing respiratory status were changed from CV to VDR. Data were obtained just before transition for CV and after stabilization on VDR, within six hours of transition. RESULTS: Both ventilation and oxygenation were significantly improved with PaCO2 decreasing from 47 ± 3 to 39 ± 11 mm Hg and PaO2 increasing from 105 ± 8 to 171 ± 12 mm Hg after transition to VDR. Treatment with the VDR ventilator also resulted in a significant decrease in peak inspiratory pressures (PIP) from 52 ± 2 to 38 ± 2 cm H2O. The PaO2 to FiO2 ratio increased from 189 ± 16 using CV, to 329 ± 21 using VDR, suggesting an improvement in the ventilation and perfusion matching. Ventilatory efficiency, measured by the PaO2/FiO2/PIP ratio, greatly improved after transition from CV to VDR with fraction of inspired oxygen increasing from 3.9 ± 0.4 to 10.3 ± 1.0. Hemodynamic function (blood pressure and pulse rate) were not adversely affected by VDR. CONCLUSIONS: The VDR ventilator is more effective than conventional ventilation for maintaining optimal gas exchange at lower airway pressures in thermally injured pediatric patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)518-522
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of the American College of Surgeons
Volume179
Issue number5
StatePublished - 1994
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Respiration
Artificial Respiration
Ventilation
Pressure
Mechanical Ventilators
Pediatrics
Perfusion
Heart Rate
Gases
Hemodynamics
Oxygen
Blood Pressure

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Rodeberg, D. A., Housinger, T. A., Greenhalgh, D. G., Maschinot, N. E., & Warden, G. D. (1994). Improved ventilatory function in burn patients using volumetric diffusive respiration. Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 179(5), 518-522.

Improved ventilatory function in burn patients using volumetric diffusive respiration. / Rodeberg, D. A.; Housinger, T. A.; Greenhalgh, David G; Maschinot, N. E.; Warden, G. D.

In: Journal of the American College of Surgeons, Vol. 179, No. 5, 1994, p. 518-522.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Rodeberg, DA, Housinger, TA, Greenhalgh, DG, Maschinot, NE & Warden, GD 1994, 'Improved ventilatory function in burn patients using volumetric diffusive respiration', Journal of the American College of Surgeons, vol. 179, no. 5, pp. 518-522.
Rodeberg, D. A. ; Housinger, T. A. ; Greenhalgh, David G ; Maschinot, N. E. ; Warden, G. D. / Improved ventilatory function in burn patients using volumetric diffusive respiration. In: Journal of the American College of Surgeons. 1994 ; Vol. 179, No. 5. pp. 518-522.
@article{5b34e00b69524bba8df51629ce3c2b2e,
title = "Improved ventilatory function in burn patients using volumetric diffusive respiration",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: Volumetric diffusive respiration (VDR) offers theoretical advantages over conventional mechanical ventilation (CV) by using lower airway pressures, recruiting alveoli, and mobilizing secretions. STUDY DESIGN: Forty-eight thermally injured pediatric patients with failing respiratory status were changed from CV to VDR. Data were obtained just before transition for CV and after stabilization on VDR, within six hours of transition. RESULTS: Both ventilation and oxygenation were significantly improved with PaCO2 decreasing from 47 ± 3 to 39 ± 11 mm Hg and PaO2 increasing from 105 ± 8 to 171 ± 12 mm Hg after transition to VDR. Treatment with the VDR ventilator also resulted in a significant decrease in peak inspiratory pressures (PIP) from 52 ± 2 to 38 ± 2 cm H2O. The PaO2 to FiO2 ratio increased from 189 ± 16 using CV, to 329 ± 21 using VDR, suggesting an improvement in the ventilation and perfusion matching. Ventilatory efficiency, measured by the PaO2/FiO2/PIP ratio, greatly improved after transition from CV to VDR with fraction of inspired oxygen increasing from 3.9 ± 0.4 to 10.3 ± 1.0. Hemodynamic function (blood pressure and pulse rate) were not adversely affected by VDR. CONCLUSIONS: The VDR ventilator is more effective than conventional ventilation for maintaining optimal gas exchange at lower airway pressures in thermally injured pediatric patients.",
author = "Rodeberg, {D. A.} and Housinger, {T. A.} and Greenhalgh, {David G} and Maschinot, {N. E.} and Warden, {G. D.}",
year = "1994",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "179",
pages = "518--522",
journal = "Journal of the American College of Surgeons",
issn = "1072-7515",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Improved ventilatory function in burn patients using volumetric diffusive respiration

AU - Rodeberg, D. A.

AU - Housinger, T. A.

AU - Greenhalgh, David G

AU - Maschinot, N. E.

AU - Warden, G. D.

PY - 1994

Y1 - 1994

N2 - BACKGROUND: Volumetric diffusive respiration (VDR) offers theoretical advantages over conventional mechanical ventilation (CV) by using lower airway pressures, recruiting alveoli, and mobilizing secretions. STUDY DESIGN: Forty-eight thermally injured pediatric patients with failing respiratory status were changed from CV to VDR. Data were obtained just before transition for CV and after stabilization on VDR, within six hours of transition. RESULTS: Both ventilation and oxygenation were significantly improved with PaCO2 decreasing from 47 ± 3 to 39 ± 11 mm Hg and PaO2 increasing from 105 ± 8 to 171 ± 12 mm Hg after transition to VDR. Treatment with the VDR ventilator also resulted in a significant decrease in peak inspiratory pressures (PIP) from 52 ± 2 to 38 ± 2 cm H2O. The PaO2 to FiO2 ratio increased from 189 ± 16 using CV, to 329 ± 21 using VDR, suggesting an improvement in the ventilation and perfusion matching. Ventilatory efficiency, measured by the PaO2/FiO2/PIP ratio, greatly improved after transition from CV to VDR with fraction of inspired oxygen increasing from 3.9 ± 0.4 to 10.3 ± 1.0. Hemodynamic function (blood pressure and pulse rate) were not adversely affected by VDR. CONCLUSIONS: The VDR ventilator is more effective than conventional ventilation for maintaining optimal gas exchange at lower airway pressures in thermally injured pediatric patients.

AB - BACKGROUND: Volumetric diffusive respiration (VDR) offers theoretical advantages over conventional mechanical ventilation (CV) by using lower airway pressures, recruiting alveoli, and mobilizing secretions. STUDY DESIGN: Forty-eight thermally injured pediatric patients with failing respiratory status were changed from CV to VDR. Data were obtained just before transition for CV and after stabilization on VDR, within six hours of transition. RESULTS: Both ventilation and oxygenation were significantly improved with PaCO2 decreasing from 47 ± 3 to 39 ± 11 mm Hg and PaO2 increasing from 105 ± 8 to 171 ± 12 mm Hg after transition to VDR. Treatment with the VDR ventilator also resulted in a significant decrease in peak inspiratory pressures (PIP) from 52 ± 2 to 38 ± 2 cm H2O. The PaO2 to FiO2 ratio increased from 189 ± 16 using CV, to 329 ± 21 using VDR, suggesting an improvement in the ventilation and perfusion matching. Ventilatory efficiency, measured by the PaO2/FiO2/PIP ratio, greatly improved after transition from CV to VDR with fraction of inspired oxygen increasing from 3.9 ± 0.4 to 10.3 ± 1.0. Hemodynamic function (blood pressure and pulse rate) were not adversely affected by VDR. CONCLUSIONS: The VDR ventilator is more effective than conventional ventilation for maintaining optimal gas exchange at lower airway pressures in thermally injured pediatric patients.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0028152802&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0028152802&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 7952452

AN - SCOPUS:0028152802

VL - 179

SP - 518

EP - 522

JO - Journal of the American College of Surgeons

JF - Journal of the American College of Surgeons

SN - 1072-7515

IS - 5

ER -