NAVA enhances tidal volume and diaphragmatic electro-myographic activity matching: a Range90 analysis of supply and demand.

Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA) is a ventilation assist mode that delivers pressure in proportionality to electrical activity of the diaphragm (Eadi). Compared to pressure support ventilation (PS), it improves patient-ventilator synchrony and should allow a better expression of patient's intrinsic respiratory variability. We hypothesize that NAVA provides better matching in ventilator tidal volume (Vt) to patients inspiratory demand. 22 patients with acute respiratory failure, ventilated with PS were included in the study. A comparative study was carried out between PS and NAVA, with NAVA gain ensuring the same peak airway pressure as PS. Robust coefficients of variation (CVR) for Eadi and Vt were compared for each mode. The integral of Eadi (ʃEadi) was used to represent patient's inspiratory demand. To evaluate tidal volume and patient's demand matching, Range90 = 5-95 % range of the Vt/ʃEadi ratio was calculated, to normalize and compare differences in demand within and between patients and modes. In this study, peak Eadi and ʃEadi are correlated with median correlation of coefficients, R > 0.95. Median ʃEadi, Vt, neural inspiratory time (Ti_ ( Neural )), inspiratory time (Ti) and peak inspiratory pressure (PIP) were similar in PS and NAVA. However, it was found that individual patients have higher or smaller ʃEadi, Vt, Ti_ ( Neural ), Ti and PIP. CVR analysis showed greater Vt variability for NAVA (p < 0.005). Range90 was lower for NAVA than PS for 21 of 22 patients. NAVA provided better matching of Vt to ʃEadi for 21 of 22 patients, and provided greater variability Vt. These results were achieved regardless of differences in ventilatory demand (Eadi) between patients and modes.

Trazodone increases arousal threshold in obstructive sleep apnoea.

A low arousal threshold is believed to predispose to breathing instability during sleep. The present authors hypothesised that trazodone, a nonmyorelaxant sleep-promoting agent, would increase the effort-related arousal threshold in obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) patients. In total, nine OSA patients, mean+/-sd age 49+/-9 yrs, apnoea/hypopnoea index 52+/-32 events.h(-1), were studied on 2 nights, one with trazodone at 100 mg and one with a placebo, in a double blind randomised fashion. While receiving continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), repeated arousals were induced: 1) by increasing inspired CO(2) and 2) by stepwise decreases in CPAP level. Respiratory effort was measured with an oesophageal balloon. End-tidal CO(2 )tension (P(ET,CO(2))) was monitored with a nasal catheter. During trazodone nights, compared with placebo nights, the arousals occurred at a higher P(ET,CO(2)) level (mean+/-sd 7.30+/-0.57 versus 6.62+/-0.64 kPa (54.9+/-4.3 versus 49.8+/-4.8 mmHg), respectively). When arousals were triggered by increasing inspired CO(2) level, the maximal oesophageal pressure swing was greater (19.4+/-4.0 versus 13.1+/-4.9 cm H(2)O) and the oesophageal pressure nadir before the arousals was lower (-5.1+/-4.7 versus -0.38+/-4.2 cm H(2)O) with trazodone. When arousals were induced by stepwise CPAP drops, the maximal oesophageal pressure swings before the arousals did not differ. Trazodone at 100 mg increased the effort-related arousal threshold in response to hypercapnia in obstructive sleep apnoea patients and allowed them to tolerate higher CO(2) levels.

Appropriateness of respiratory care: evidence-based guidelines.

PRINCIPLES: Respiratory care is universally recognised as useful, but its indications and practice vary markedly. In order to improve the appropriateness of respiratory care in our hospital, we developed evidence-based local guidelines in a collaborative effort involving physiotherapists, physicians and health service researchers. METHODS: Recommendations were developed using the standardised RAND appropriateness method. A literature search was conducted based on terms associated with guidelines and with respiratory care. A working group prepared proposals for recommendations which were then independently rated by a multidisciplinary expert panel. All recommendations were then discussed in common and indications for procedures were rated confidentially a second time by the experts. The recommendations were then formulated on the basis of the level of evidence in the literature and on the consensus among these experts. RESULTS: Recommendations were formulated for the following procedures: non-invasive ventilation, continuous positive airway pressure, intermittent positive pressure breathing, intrapulmonary percussive ventilation, mechanical insufflation-exsufflation, incentive spirometry, positive expiratory pressure, nasotracheal suctioning and non-instrumental airway clearance techniques. Each recommendation referred to a particular medical condition and was assigned to a hierarchical category based on the quality of the evidence from the literature supporting the recommendation and on the consensus among the experts. CONCLUSION: Despite a marked heterogeneity of scientific evidence, the method used allowed us to develop commonly agreed local guidelines for respiratory care. In addition, this work fostered a closer relationship between physiotherapists and physicians in our institution.