BACKGROUND: Adjusting trunk inclination from a semi-recumbent position to a supine-flat position or vice versa in patients with respiratory failure significantly affects numerous aspects of respiratory physiology including respiratory mechanics, oxygenation, end-expiratory lung volume, and ventilatory efficiency. Despite these observed effects, the current clinical evidence regarding this positioning manoeuvre is limited. This study undertakes a scoping review of patients with respiratory failure undergoing mechanical ventilation to assess the effect of trunk inclination on physiological lung parameters.
METHODS: The PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus databases were systematically searched from 2003 to 2023.
METHODS: Changes in trunk inclination.
METHODS: Four domains were evaluated in this study: 1) respiratory mechanics, 2) ventilation distribution, 3) oxygenation, and 4) ventilatory efficiency.
RESULTS: After searching the three databases and removing duplicates, 220 studies were screened. Of these, 37 were assessed in detail, and 13 were included in the final analysis, comprising 274 patients. All selected studies were experimental, and assessed respiratory mechanics, ventilation distribution, oxygenation, and ventilatory efficiency, primarily within 60 min post postural change.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with acute respiratory failure, transitioning from a supine to a semi-recumbent position leads to decreased respiratory system compliance and increased airway driving pressure. Additionally, C-ARDS patients experienced an improvement in ventilatory efficiency, which resulted in lower PaCO2 levels. Improvements in oxygenation were observed in a few patients and only in those who exhibited an increase in EELV upon moving to a semi-recumbent position. Therefore, the trunk inclination angle must be accurately reported in patients with respiratory failure under mechanical ventilation.

Driving pressure (∆P) is a core therapeutic component of mechanical ventilation (MV). Varying levels of ∆P have been employed during MV depending on the type of underlying pathology and severity of injury. However, ∆P levels have also been shown to closely impact hard endpoints such as mortality. Considering this, conducting an in-depth review of ∆P as a unique, outcome-impacting therapeutic modality is extremely important. There is a need to understand the subtleties involved in making sure ∆P levels are optimized to enhance outcomes and minimize harm. We performed this narrative review to further explore the various uses of ∆P, the different parameters that can affect its use, and how outcomes vary in different patient populations at different pressure levels. To better utilize ∆P in MV-requiring patients, additional large-scale clinical studies are needed.

Mechanical ventilation serves as crucial life support for critically ill patients. Although it is life-saving prolonged ventilation carries risks and complications like barotrauma, Ventilator-associated pneumonia, sepsis, and many others. Optimizing patient-ventilator interactions and facilitating early weaning is necessary for improved intensive care unit (ICU) outcomes. Traditionally Pressure support ventilation (PSV) mode is widely used for weaning patients who are intubated and mechanically ventilated. Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA) mode of the ventilator is an emerging ventilator mode that delivers pressure depending on the patient\'s respiratory drive, which in turn prevents over-inflation and improves the patient\'s ventilator interactions. Our article revises and compares the effectiveness of NAVA compared to PSV ventilation under different contexts. Overall we conclude that NAVA level of ventilation can be safely administered in a patient with acute respiratory failure, provided diaphragmatic paralysis is not considered. NAVA improves asynchrony index, wean-off time, and sleep quality and is associated with increased ventilator-free days. These results are based on small-scale studies with low power, and further studies are warranted in large-scale cohorts with more diverse populations to confirm these results.

Many RCTs have evaluated the influence of intraoperative tidal volume (tV), PEEP, and driving pressure on the occurrence of postoperative pulmonary complications, cardiovascular complications, and mortality in adult patients. Our meta-analysis aimed to investigate the association between tV, PEEP, and driving pressure and the above-mentioned outcomes.
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs from inception to May 19, 2022. The primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications; the secondary outcomes were intraoperative cardiovascular complications and 30-day mortality. Primary and secondary outcomes were evaluated stratifying patients in the following groups: (1) low tV (LV, tV 6-8 ml kg-1 and PEEP ≥5 cm H2O) vs high tV (HV, tV >8 ml kg-1 and PEEP=0 cm H2O); (2) higher PEEP (HP, ≥6 cm H2O) vs lower PEEP (LP, <6 cm H2O); and (3) driving pressure-guided PEEP (DP) vs fixed PEEP (FP).
We included 16 RCTs with a total sample size of 4993. The incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications was lower in patients treated with LV than with HV (OR=0.402, CI 0.280-0.577, P<0.001) and lower in DP than in FP group (OR=0.358, CI 0.187-0.684, P=0.002). Postoperative pulmonary complications did not differ between HP and LP groups; the incidence of intraoperative cardiovascular complications was higher in HP group (OR=1.385, CI 1.027-1.867, P=0.002). The 30-day mortality was not influenced by the ventilation strategy.
Optimal intraoperative mechanical ventilation is unclear; however, our meta-analysis showed that low tidal volume and driving pressure-guided PEEP strategies were associated with a reduction in postoperative pulmonary complications.

The primary goals of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) are to restore functional residual capacity through recruitment and prevention of alveolar collapse. Through these mechanisms, PEEP improves arterial oxygenation and may reduce the risk of ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI). Because of the many potential negative effects associated with the use of PEEP, much research has concentrated on determining the optimal PEEP setting. Arterial oxygenation targets and pressure-volume loops have been utilized to set the optimal PEEP for decades. Several other techniques have been suggested, including the use of PEEP tables, compliance, driving pressure (DP), stress index (SI), transpulmonary pressures, imaging, and electrical impedance tomography. Each of these techniques has its own benefits and limitations and there is currently not one technique that is recommended above all others.

UNASSIGNED: Hypoxemia and fluctuations in respiratory mechanics parameters are common during one-lung ventilation (OLV) in thoracic surgery. Additionally, the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCS) in thoracic surgery is higher than that in other surgeries. Previous studies have demonstrated that driving pressure-oriented ventilation can reduce both mortality in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and the incidence of PPCS in patients undergoing general anesthesia. Our aim was to determine whether driving pressure-oriented ventilation improves intraoperative physiology and outcomes in patients undergoing thoracic surgery.
UNASSIGNED: We searched MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov and performed a meta-analysis to compare the effects of driving pressure-oriented ventilation with other ventilation strategies on patients undergoing OLV. The primary outcome was the PaO2/FiO2 ratio (P/F ratio) during OLV. The secondary outcomes were the incidence of PPCS during follow-up, compliance of the respiratory system during OLV, and mean arterial pressure during OLV.
UNASSIGNED: This review included seven studies, with a total of 640 patients. The PaO2/FiO2 ratio was higher during OLV in the driving pressure-oriented ventilation group (mean difference [MD]: 44.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 24.22-65.70.32; I 2: 58%; P < 0.0001). The incidence of PPCS was lower (OR: 0.58; 95% CI, 0.34-0.99; I 2: 0%; P = 0.04) and the compliance of the respiratory system was higher (MD: 6.15; 95% CI, 3.97-8.32; I 2: 57%; P < 0.00001) in the driving pressure-oriented group during OLV. We did not find a significant difference in the mean arterial pressure between the two groups.
UNASSIGNED: Driving pressure-oriented ventilation during OLV in patients undergoing thoracic surgery was associated with better perioperative oxygenation, fewer PPCS, and improved compliance of the respiratory system.
UNASSIGNED: PROSPERO, identifier: CRD42021297063.

A strategy that limits tidal volumes and inspiratory pressures, improves outcomes in patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO2R) may facilitate ultra-protective ventilation. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of venovenous ECCO2R in supporting ultra-protective ventilation in moderate-to-severe ARDS.
MEDLINE and EMBASE were interrogated for studies (2000-2021) reporting venovenous ECCO2R use in patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS. Studies reporting ≥10 adult patients in English language journals were included. Ventilatory parameters after 24 h of initiating ECCO2R, device characteristics, and safety outcomes were collected. The primary outcome measure was the change in driving pressure at 24 h of ECCO2R therapy in relation to baseline. Secondary outcomes included change in tidal volume, gas exchange, and safety data.
Ten studies reporting 421 patients (PaO2:FiO2 141.03 mmHg) were included. Extracorporeal blood flow rates ranged from 0.35-1.5 L/min. Random effects modelling indicated a 3.56 cmH2O reduction (95%-CI: 3.22-3.91) in driving pressure from baseline (p < .001) and a 1.89 mL/kg (95%-CI: 1.75-2.02, p < .001) reduction in tidal volume. Oxygenation, respiratory rate and PEEP remained unchanged. No significant interactions between driving pressure reduction and baseline driving pressure, partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide or PaO2:FiO2 ratio were identified in metaregression analysis. Bleeding and haemolysis were the commonest complications of therapy.
Venovenous ECCO2R permitted significant reductions in ∆P in patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS. Heterogeneity amongst studies and devices, a paucity of randomised controlled trials, and variable safety reporting calls for standardisation of outcome reporting. Prospective evaluation of optimal device operation and anticoagulation in high quality studies is required before further recommendations can be made.

The mortality of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remains high, and mechanical ventilation (MV) is an essential means of treatment. During MV, people realize the benefits of spontaneous breathing and the disadvantages of uncontrolled spontaneous breathing. Current methods of monitoring spontaneous breathing include oesophageal manometry, P0.1, and diaphragm function monitoring. However, these methods have limitations and deficiencies. The driving pressure is a new indicator that reflects the strain of the lung, which indicates the volumetric injury of the lung and is independently associated with mortality in ARDS patients. Moreover, in recent studies, driving pressure monitoring has been shown to be feasible in assisted support ventilation. This review summarizes the current state of spontaneous breathing and examines whether it is convenient to monitor driving pressure during spontaneous breathing to achieve lung protection ventilation.