BACKGROUND: Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) are associated with postoperative mortality and prolonged hospital stay. Although intraoperative mechanical ventilation (MV) is a risk factor for PPCs, strategies addressing weaning from MV are understudied. In this systematic review, we evaluated weaning strategies and their effects on postoperative pulmonary outcomes.
METHODS: Our protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022379145). Eligible studies included randomised controlled trials and observational studies of adults weaned from MV in the operating room. Primary outcomes included atelectasis and oxygenation; secondary outcomes included lung volume changes and PPCs. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB2) tool, and quality of evidence with the GRADE framework.
RESULTS: Screening identified 14 randomised controlled trials including 1719 patients; seven studies were limited to the weaning phase and seven included interventions not restricted to the weaning phase. Strategies combining pressure support ventilation (PSV) with positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and low fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) improved atelectasis, oxygenation, and lung volumes. Low FiO2 improved atelectasis and oxygenation but might not improve lung volumes. A fixed-PEEP strategy led to no improvement in oxygenation or atelectasis; however, individualised PEEP with low FiO2 improved oxygenation and might be associated with reduced PPCs. Half of included studies are of moderate or high risk of bias; the overall quality of evidence is low.
CONCLUSIONS: There is limited research evaluating weaning from intraoperative MV. Based on low-quality evidence, PSV, individualised PEEP, and low FiO2 may be associated with reduced postoperative pulmonary outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: PROSPERO (CRD42022379145).

UNASSIGNED: The successful implementation of assisted ventilation depends on matching the patient\'s effort with the ventilator support. Pressure muscle index (PMI), an airway pressure based measurement, has been used as noninvasive monitoring to assess the patient\'s inspiratory effort. The authors aimed to evaluate the feasibility of pressure support adjustment according to the PMI target and the diagnostic performance of PMI to predict the contribution of the patient\'s effort during ventilator support.
UNASSIGNED: In this prospective physiological study, 22 adult patients undergoing pressure support ventilation were enrolled. After an end-inspiratory airway occlusion, airway pressure reached a plateau, and the magnitude of change in plateau from peak airway pressure was defined as PMI. Pressure support was adjusted to obtain the PMI which was closest to -1, 0, +1, +2, and + 3 cm H2O. Each pressure support level was maintained for 20 min. Esophageal pressure was monitored. Pressure-time products of respiratory muscle and ventilator insufflation were measured, and the fraction of pressure generated by the patient was calculated to represent the contribution of the patient\'s inspiratory effort.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 105 datasets were collected at different PMI-targeted pressure support levels. The differences in PMI between the target and the obtained value were all within ±1 cm H2O. As targeted PMI increased, pressure support settings decreased significantly from a median (interquartile range) of 11 (10-12) to 5 (4-6) cm H2O (p < 0.001), which resulted in a significant increase in pressure-time products of respiratory muscle [from 2.9 (2.1-5.0) to 6.8 (5.3-8.1) cm H2O•s] and the fraction of pressure generated by the patient [from 25% (19-31%) to 72% (62-87%)] (p < 0.001). The area under receiver operating characteristic curves for PMI to predict 30 and 70% contribution of patient\'s effort were 0.93 and 0.95, respectively. High sensitivity (all 1.00), specificity (0.86 and 0.78), and negative predictive value (all 1.00), but low positive predictive value (0.61 and 0.43) were obtained to predict either high or low contribution of patient\'s effort.
UNASSIGNED: Our results preliminarily suggested the feasibility of pressure support adjustment according to the PMI target from the ventilator screen. PMI could reliably predict the high and low contribution of a patient\'s effort during assisted ventilation.Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT05970393.

BACKGROUND: Patient-ventilator asynchrony commonly occurs during pressure support ventilation (PSV). IntelliSync + software (Hamilton Medical AG, Bonaduz, Switzerland) is a new ventilation technology that continuously analyzes ventilator waveforms to detect the beginning and end of patient inspiration in real time. This study aimed to evaluate the physiological effect of IntelliSync + software on inspiratory trigger delay time, delta airway (Paw) and esophageal (Pes) pressure drop during the trigger phase, airway occlusion pressure at 0.1 s (P0.1), and hemodynamic variables.
METHODS: A randomized crossover physiologic study was conducted in 14 mechanically ventilated patients under PSV. Patients were randomly assigned to receive conventional flow trigger and cycling, inspiratory trigger synchronization (I-sync), cycle synchronization (C-sync), and inspiratory trigger and cycle synchronization (I/C-sync) for 15 min at each step. Other ventilator settings were kept constant. Paw, Pes, airflow, P0.1, respiratory rate, SpO2, and hemodynamic variables were recorded. The primary outcome was inspiratory trigger and cycle delay time between each intervention. Secondary outcomes were delta Paw and Pes drop during the trigger phase, P0.1, SpO2, and hemodynamic variables.
RESULTS: The time to initiate the trigger was significantly shorter with I-sync compared to baseline (208.9±91.7 vs. 301.4±131.7 msec; P = 0.002) and I/C-sync compared to baseline (222.8±94.0 vs. 301.4±131.7 msec; P = 0.005). The I/C-sync group had significantly lower delta Paw and Pes drop during the trigger phase compared to C-sync group (-0.7±0.4 vs. -1.2±0.8 cmH2O; P = 0.028 and - 1.8±2.2 vs. -2.8±3.2 cmH2O; P = 0.011, respectively). No statistically significant differences were found in cycle delay time, P0.1 and other physiological variables between the groups.
CONCLUSIONS: IntelliSync + software reduced inspiratory trigger delay time compared to the conventional flow trigger system during PSV mode. However, no significant improvements in cycle delay time and other physiological variables were observed with IntelliSync + software.
BACKGROUND: This study was registered in the Thai Clinical Trial Registry (TCTR20200528003; date of registration 28/05/2020).

BACKGROUND: Patients receiving mechanical ventilation commonly experience sleep fragmentation. The present meta-analysis compared the effects of pressure controlled ventilation (PCV) and pressure support ventilation (PSV) on sleep quality.
METHODS: We conducted a search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for studies published before November 2023. In this meta-analysis, individual effect sizes were standardized, and the pooled effect size was determined by using random-effects models. The primary outcome was sleep efficiency. The secondary outcomes were wakefulness, percentages of REM (rapid eye movement) sleep and stages 3 and 4 non-REM sleep, the fragmentation index, and the incidence of apneic events.
RESULTS: This meta-analysis examined 4 trials that involved 67 subjects. Sleep efficiency was significantly higher in the PCV group than in the PSV group (mean difference 15.57%, 95% CI 8.54%-22.59%). Wakefulness was significantly lower in the PCV group than in the PSV group (mean difference -18.67%, 95% CI -30.29% to -7.04%). The percentage of REM sleep was significantly higher in the PCV group than in the PSV group (mean difference 2.32%, 95% CI 0.20%-4.45%). Among the subjects with a tendency to develop sleep apnea, the fragmentation index was significantly lower in those receiving PCV than PSV (mean difference -40.00%, 95% CI -51.12% to -28.88%). The incidence of apneic events was significantly lower in the PCV group than in the PSV group (risk ratio 0.06, 95% CI 0.01-0.45).
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with PSV, PCV may improve sleep quality in patients receiving nocturnal mechanical ventilation.

BACKGROUND: During Pressure Support Ventilation (PSV) an inspiratory hold allows to measure plateau pressure (Pplat), driving pressure (∆P), respiratory system compliance (Crs) and pressure-muscle-index (PMI), an index of inspiratory effort. This study aims [1] to assess systematically how patient\'s effort (estimated with PMI), ∆P and tidal volume (Vt) change in response to variations in PSV and [2] to confirm the robustness of Crs measurement during PSV.
METHODS: 18 patients recovering from acute respiratory failure and ventilated by PSV were cross-randomized to four steps of assistance above (+ 3 and + 6 cmH2O) and below (-3 and -6 cmH2O) clinically set PS. Inspiratory and expiratory holds were performed to measure Pplat, PMI, ∆P, Vt, Crs, P0.1 and occluded inspiratory airway pressure (Pocc). Electromyography of respiratory muscles was monitored noninvasively from body surface (sEMG).
RESULTS: As PSV was decreased, Pplat (from 20.5 ± 3.3 cmH2O to 16.7 ± 2.9, P < 0.001) and ∆P (from 12.5 ± 2.3 to 8.6 ± 2.3 cmH2O, P < 0.001) decreased much less than peak airway pressure did (from 21.7 ± 3.8 to 9.7 ± 3.8 cmH2O, P < 0.001), given the progressive increase of patient\'s effort (PMI from -1.2 ± 2.3 to 6.4 ± 3.2 cmH2O) in line with sEMG of the diaphragm (r = 0.614; P < 0.001). As ∆P increased linearly with Vt, Crs did not change through steps (P = 0.119).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients react to a decrease in PSV by increasing inspiratory effort-as estimated by PMI-keeping Vt and ∆P on a desired value, therefore, limiting the clinician\'s ability to modulate them. PMI appears a valuable index to assess the point of ventilatory overassistance when patients lose control over Vt like in a pressure-control mode. The measurement of Crs in PSV is constant-likely suggesting reliability-independently from the level of assistance and patient\'s effort.

BACKGROUND: Internal redistribution of gas, referred to as pendelluft, is a new potential mechanism of effort-dependent lung injury. Neurally-adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA) and proportional assist ventilation (PAV +) follow the patient\'s respiratory effort and improve synchrony compared with pressure support ventilation (PSV). Whether these modes could prevent the development of pendelluft compared with PSV is unknown. We aimed to compare pendelluft magnitude during PAV + and NAVA versus PSV in patients with resolving acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).
METHODS: Patients received either NAVA, PAV + , or PSV in a crossover trial for 20-min using comparable assistance levels after controlled ventilation (> 72 h). We assessed pendelluft (the percentage of lost volume from the non-dependent lung region displaced to the dependent region during inspiration), drive (as the delta esophageal swing of the first 100 ms [ΔPes 100 ms]) and inspiratory effort (as the esophageal pressure-time product per minute [PTPmin]). We performed repeated measures analysis with post-hoc tests and mixed-effects models.
RESULTS: Twenty patients mechanically ventilated for 9 [5-14] days were monitored. Despite matching for a similar tidal volume, respiratory drive and inspiratory effort were slightly higher with NAVA and PAV + compared with PSV (ΔPes 100 ms of -2.8 [-3.8--1.9] cm H2O, -3.6 [-3.9--2.4] cm H2O and -2.1 [-2.5--1.1] cm H2O, respectively, p < 0.001 for both comparisons; PTPmin of 155 [118-209] cm H2O s/min, 197 [145-269] cm H2O s/min, and 134 [93-169] cm H2O s/min, respectively, p < 0.001 for both comparisons). Pendelluft magnitude was higher in NAVA (12 ± 7%) and PAV + (13 ± 7%) compared with PSV (8 ± 6%), p < 0.001. Pendelluft magnitude was strongly associated with respiratory drive (β = -2.771, p-value < 0.001) and inspiratory effort (β = 0.026, p  < 0.001), independent of the ventilatory mode. A higher magnitude of pendelluft in proportional modes compared with PSV existed after adjusting for PTPmin (β = 2.606, p = 0.010 for NAVA, and β = 3.360, p = 0.004 for PAV +), and only for PAV + when adjusted for respiratory drive (β = 2.643, p = 0.009 for PAV +).
CONCLUSIONS: Pendelluft magnitude is associated with respiratory drive and inspiratory effort. Proportional modes do not prevent its occurrence in resolving ARDS compared with PSV.

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.

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic led to the development and implementation of emergency ventilators owing to the shortage of ventilators globally. Using invasive ventilators for patient intubation has medical experts concerned about increasing mortality. Early intervention with oxygen and respiratory therapy reduces the need for intubation, increases survival rates, and reduces the stress of critical care ventilators in hospitals. This study explores the capabilities of an easy-to-build and accessible non-invasive ventilator during an emergency and the practical implementation of the ventilator beyond the scope of the emergency. The proposed system consists of a high-pressure turbine integrated with a microcontroller and pressure and flow sensors assembled in a portable design. The non-invasive pressure support system is tested with a single-chamber high-precision lung simulator capable of simulating multiple lung diseases. The system is operated in a spontaneous pressure support mode as a Bi-level Ventilator for varying degrees of pressure level and lung conditions. The proposed study implements two most commonly adapted non-invasive patient circuits, i.e., single passive limb leak circuit and single limb active circuit. Both circuits are tested with and without leakage compensation. Two clinically accepted ventilation modes, i.e., pressure support and volume-assured pressure support ventilation, are presented. The results demonstrate the feasibility of using this type of device for non-invasive respiratory support and highlight the need for further testing to assess its safety and effectiveness in various clinical settings.

UNASSIGNED: Severe COVID-19 is a life-threatening condition characterized by complications such as interstitial pneumonia, hypoxic respiratory failure, and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Non-pharmacological intervention with mechanical ventilation plays a key role in treating COVID-19-related ARDS but is influenced by a high risk of failure in more severe patients. Dexmedetomidine is a new generation highly selective α2-adrenergic receptor (α2-AR) agonist that provides sedative effects with preservation of respiratory function. The aim of this study is to assess how dexmedetomidine influences gas exchange during non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) in moderate to severe ARDS caused by COVID-19 in a non-intensive care setting.
UNASSIGNED: This is a single center retrospective cohort study. We included patients who showed moderate to severe respiratory distress. All included subjects had indication to NIV and were suitable for a non-intensive setting of care. A total of 170 patients were included, divided in a control group (n = 71) and a treatment group (DEX group, n = 99).
UNASSIGNED: A total of 170 patients were hospitalized for moderate to severe ARDS and COVID-19. The median age was 71 years, 29% females. The median Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) was 2.5. Obesity affected 21% of the study population. The median pO2/FiO2 was 82 mmHg before treatment. After treatment, the increase of pO2/FiO2 ratio was clinically and statistically significant in the DEX group compared to the controls (125 mmHg [97-152] versus 94 mmHg [75-122]; ***p < 0.0001). A significative reduction of NIV duration was observed in DEX group (10 [7-16] days vs. 13 [10-17] days; *p < 0.02). Twenty four patients required IMV in control group (n = 71) and 16 patients in DEX group (n = 99) with a reduction of endotracheal intubation of 62% (OR 0.38; **p < 0.008). A higher incidence of sinus bradycardia was observed in the DEX group.
UNASSIGNED: Dexmedetomidine provides a \"calm and arousal\" status which allows spontaneous ventilation in awake patients treated with NIV and HFNC. The adjunctive therapy with dexmedetomidine is associated with a higher pO2/FiO2, lower duration of NIV, and a lower risk of NIV failure. A higher incidence of sinus bradycardia needs to be considered.

BACKGROUND: Reverse triggered breath (RTB) has been extensively described during assisted-controlled modes of ventilation. We aimed to assess whether RTB occurs during Pressure Support Ventilation (PSV) and Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist (NAVA) at varying depths of propofol sedation.
METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of a prospective crossover randomized controlled trial conducted in an Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of a university hospital. Fourteen intubated patients for acute respiratory failure received six trials of 25 minutes randomly applying PSV and NAVA at three different propofol infusions: awake, light, and deep sedation. We assessed the occurrence of RTBs at each protocol step. The incidence level of RTBs was determined through the RTB index, which was calculated by dividing RTBs by the total number of breaths triggered and not triggered.
RESULTS: RTBs occurred during both PSV and NAVA. The RTB index was greater during PSV than during NAVA at mild (1.5 [0.0; 5.3]% vs. 0.6 [0.0; 1.1]%) and deep (5.9 [0.7; 9.0]% vs. 1.7 [0.9; 3.5]%) sedation.
CONCLUSIONS: RTB occurs in patients undergoing assisted mechanical ventilation. The level of propofol sedation and the mode of ventilation may influence the incidence of RTBs.