|
|
||||||||
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Objective To determine if tracheal gas insufflation can reduce ventilatory demand during weaning trials in patients who require prolonged mechanical ventilation.
Methods A reduction in ventilatory demand was defined as a relative decrease in tidal volume, minute ventilation, and mean inspiratory flow during trials with tracheal gas insufflation compared with the values during trials without this therapy. A total of 14 subjects underwent T-piece trials with and without insufflation (flow rate 6 L/min) on 2 consecutive days; the order of insufflation was randomized. Tidal volume, minute ventilation, and mean inspiratory flow were measured at baseline (without insufflation) and 2 hours later.
Results Differences in ventilatory demand were not significant when comparisons were made for condition (tracheal gas insufflation vs no flow) or time (baseline vs 2 hours) for the total group (P = .48). Subjects were classified post hoc as responders (n = 9) or nonresponders (n = 5). Comparisons between responders and nonresponders indicated a significant (P = .02) 3-way multivariate interaction for group (responder vs nonresponder), condition (tracheal gas insufflation vs no flow), and time (baseline vs 2 hours) for ventilatory demand variables.
Conclusion Tracheal gas insufflation can reduce ventilatory demand during weaning trials in some patients who require mechanical ventilation.
Tracheal gas insufflation (TGI) is an adjunctive ventilatory technique that involves inserting a small catheter through an endotracheal or tracheostomy tube to a level just above the carina.10 Alternatively, a catheter can be inserted percutaneously through the anterior wall of the trachea.11 Gas is insufflated through the catheter at various flow rates (eg, 210 L/min). TGI can produce an increase in exercise tolerance and a reduction in dyspnea in spontaneously breathing patients with chronic respiratory disease.1114 Several mechanisms may contribute to this effect.
First, the catheter delivers gas lower in the airways than during normal breathing, a condition that reduces anatomic dead space (VDS).15,16 Second, part of the inspired tidal volume (VT) enters the lungs passively through the catheter, a situation that decreases the oxygen cost of breathing.17 Finally, TGI improves the efficiency of carbon dioxide elimination.18,19 During expiration, gas insufflated by the catheter flushes gas laden with carbon dioxide from the anatomic and apparatus dead space proximal to the catheter tip (Figure 1
). As a result, the amount of carbon dioxide recycled to the alveoli during the next inspiration is reduced, increasing the ventilatory efficiency of each tidal breath.10 Consequently, TGI may reduce ventilatory demand.1117,20
|
Bergofsky and Hurewitz15 tested the potential advantages of TGI in 5 patients with chronic respiratory failure due to obstructive or restrictive disease. VDS, VT, and minute ventilation (Vmin) were significantly less with TGI than with the no-flow condition. Two patients continued to use TGI for 12 months or longer, and both had fewer episodes of acute respiratory failure that required mechanical ventilation while using TGI than while receiving oxygen via a tracheostomy mask. Hurewitz et al16 extended this work by examining mechanisms that might explain the benefits of TGI. With TGI at flow rates of 1, 5, and 8 L/min, VDS, VT, and Vmin progressively decreased without an accompanying increase in PaCO2. The reduction in Vmin was achieved primarily via a reduction in VT, whereas respiratory rate had almost no change at any flow rate.
Nakos et al21 tested the effects of TGI at flow rates of 3 and 6 L/min during weaning in 12 spontaneously breathing patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who were undergoing weaning trials. In these subjects, TGI progressively decreased the ratio of VDS to VT (VDS/VT), VT, and Vmin; effects were greatest at the highest flow rates. Schönhofer et al22 found similar changes in 8 patients with COPD treated with TGI immediately after weaning from mechanical ventilation. In another study,23 Schönhofer et al found a 28% decrease in inspiratory work of breathing relative to Vmin when TGI was used in 6 patients with COPD who had undergone long-term mechanical ventilation. In combination, the findings of these studies15,16,2123 support the notion that TGI can decrease ventilatory demand in patients with COPD when delivered during or just after weaning from mechanical ventilation.
The ability of TGI to promote weaning from mechanical ventilation was tested previously only in patients with COPD.2123 Because it decreases VT, Vmin, and mean inspiratory flow or the ratio of VT to inspiratory time (VT/TI), TGI may also be useful in weaning patients with other types of pulmonary dysfunction from prolonged mechanical ventilation. Accordingly, we tested the ability of TGI to reduce ventilatory demand during weaning from mechanical ventilation in patients with and without COPD who required prolonged (>14 days) mechanical ventilation. A reduction in ventilatory demand was defined as a relative decrease in VT , Vmin, and VT/TI during trials with TGI compared with the values during trials without this therapy.
| Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Experimental Protocol
Each subject underwent a 2-hour T-piece weaning trial with and without TGI (flow rate 6 L/min) on 2 consecutive days; the order of TGI was randomized. Baseline data were collected to determine respiratory frequency, VT, Vmin, and VT/TI 5 minutes after the beginning of the T-piece trial (baseline) and 2 hours later. During TGI trials, baseline data were obtained before TGI was started. Mean arterial blood pressure (cuff pressure), heart rate (standard lead II electrocardiogram), and arterial oxygen saturation (as determined by pulse oximetry; SpO2) were measured at the same time points. The protocol required that data collection be terminated if any of the following occurred: SpO2 less than 88%, heart rate greater than 120/min, respirations greater than 35/min or greater than a 15% increase from baseline, new dysrhythmia or change in baseline dysrhythmia, or request for discontinuation by the subject.
TGI Apparatus
A single distal-lumen catheter (internal diameter 1.67 mm) was inserted through a jet-ventilator adapter (model 600101, Concord/Portex, Keene, NH) for TGI (Figure 2
). Before the catheter was inserted, a recent chest radiograph was assessed to determine the position of the tracheal tube in relationship to the carina. The catheter was then passed ex vivo through a tracheal tube of the same size and model as that used in the patient to a position that would place the catheter tip approximately 1 cm above the carina and was locked in position by using the jet-ventilator adapter. The catheter and adapter were then inserted into the patients tracheal tube. Gas was delivered through a calibrated flow generator (Bellofram, Newell, WV) at a flow rate of 6 L/min with the same fraction of inspired oxygen (0.400.50) as that ordered for the weaning trial (Air/O2 Microblender, Bird Products Corp, Palm Springs, Calif). No humidification of the insufflated gas was used because of the short duration of the study.
|
Respiratory Inductive Plethysmography
Respiratory inductive plethysmography bands were positioned and secured around the patients rib cage and abdomen. The plethysmography device (RespiTrace Plus, Nims, Miami Beach, Fla) was calibrated by using the semiquantitative single-position calibration method, with the patient receiving breaths of consistent volume from the ventilator.24 Subjects were placed in the same position after the bands were positioned and were maintained in this position throughout calibration and the experimental protocol on both days. Respiratory inductive plethysmography was used to directly measure all gas entering the patients lungs, because total inspired VT included gas from spontaneous inspiration and TGI-derived gas. In addition, respiratory inductive plethysmography was used to measure respirations and VT/TI. Signals from the RespiTrace were imported for 5 minutes at each data collection point and were stored in a computer (Colorbook DX2-50, Gateway 2000, N Sioux City, SD) by using RespiEvents software (Version 4.1, Nims, Miami Beach, Fla). A minimum of 1 minute of continuous respiratory inductive plethysmography data was used for analysis.
Data Analysis
Data were analyzed for the total group and for responders and nonresponders to TGI by using multivariate and univariate analyses of variance. Subjects were classified as responders or nonresponders post hoc by using change scores calculated by subtracting the baseline values for VT, Vmin, and VT/TI from the 2-hour values. Responders were defined as subjects who had a minimum of 20% difference (decrease or less of an increase) with TGI than without TGI in at least 2 of the 3 parameters measured. Subjects who did not fulfill these criteria were defined as nonresponders. Demographic data and data on medical conditions were analyzed by using the Fisher exact test (diagnosis, sex) and the Mann-Whitney test (age, ventilator days, pretrial PaCO2 from an arterial blood gas analysis) with a Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons. Differences were considered significant at P<.05.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
Responders and Nonresponders
On the basis of change scores, 9 subjects were classified as responders and 5 subjects as nonresponders. Comparisons between responders and nonresponders indicated a significant (P = .02) 3-way multivariate interaction for group (responder vs nonresponder), condition (TGI vs no flow), and time (baseline vs 2 hours) for ventilatory demand variables (Table 2
). In addition, analysis revealed significant 3-way univariate interactions (group, condition, time) for VT (P = .006), Vmin (P = .008), and VT/TI (P < .001).
|
|
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
For a given level of ventilation, increasing respiratory rate, although simultaneously limiting the VT of each breath, can minimize energy output. The consequence (ie, rapid, shallow breathing) can be considered an adaptation to reduce fatigue. Unfortunately, as VT decreases, VDS increases, and this increase reduces ventilatory efficiency. Therefore, Vmin must be increased or hypercapnia will develop.79 In this situation, TGI might confer unique benefits because it can reduce VDS/VT and inspired VT and enhance the efficiency of carbon dioxide elimination, thus decreasing the imbalance between ventilatory demand and capacity. Our findings suggest that use of TGI may reduce ventilatory demand, but only in patients with underlying obstructive or restrictive pulmonary dysfunction.
Nakos et al21 evaluated the effect of TGI in 12 spontaneously breathing patients with COPD who were undergoing weaning from mechanical ventilation; 7 of the 12 had an endotracheal tube in place, and 5 had a tracheostomy tube. During TGI, VT, Vmin, PaCO2, and VDS/VT were reduced in a flow-dependent manner when gas was delivered through the endotracheal tube at flow rates of 3 and 6 L/min. The patients with tracheostomy tubes had a similar response, but significant changes occurred only during the higher flow rate (ie, 6 L/min), presumably because the tracheostomy reduced VDS. In our study, we used a single flow rate (6 L/min), and the responder group, predominately patients with obstructive lung disease, had similar changes in VT and Vmin.
The group we characterized as nonresponders had different changes. Without TGI, nonresponders increased respiratory rate 16% but had minimal increases in VT (2%) and Vmin (5%), as would be anticipated during a weaning trial. During TGI, respirations changed minimally (8%), but marked increases occurred in VT (24%) and Vmin (42%). Consequently, the ventilatory pattern in nonresponders did not change despite tracheal gas flow. Thus, the patients realized a 100-mL increase in VT equivalent to the gas flow delivered by the catheter during inspiration. The reason neither respiratory rate nor VT decreased during TGI is unknown, but it might have been an overriding increase in respiratory drive. All patients characterized as nonresponders experienced acute respiratory failure due to an acute pulmonary process and, except for 1 patient, were normocapnic. Notably, the nonresponder who was hypercapnic was a heart-lung transplant recipient. Presumably, the consequences of pulmonary denervation precluded a similar response in this patient, as in other patients with hypercapnia. The ventilatory response to TGI in hypercapnic patients with obstructive and restrictive lung disease in our study was similar to that reported in patients receiving transtracheal oxygen therapy.1114 Like our patients, those patients consistently had a substantial reduction in inspired VT and Vmin. Further, airway insufflation via a transtracheal catheter reduces the oxygen cost of breathing and shifts the diaphragm to a less demanding pattern.17 The changes in responders to TGI might facilitate the ability to tolerate a longer weaning trial; however, we did not evaluate this potential.
Responses to TGI in patients who experienced acute respiratory failure and were successfully weaned from mechanical ventilation were evaluated in several other studies. Schönhofer et al22,23 inserted a transtracheal catheter into the tracheostomy stoma and closed the area around the stoma with a latex membrane. Thereafter, measures were taken during two 1-hour trials in which patients received TGI at a flow rate of 2 L/min or no flow. However, the long-term response was not evaluated. Bergofsky et al15 used a similar technique in 5 patients with chronic hypercapnia and a permanent tracheostomy. Of these 5 patients, 2 chose to continue use of TGI through the tracheostomy stoma, which was allowed to close around the catheter. In these 2, the number of episodes of respiratory failure requiring intubation was reduced during 4 and 12 months of follow-up, suggesting that TGI may confer benefits over an extended period in patients with chronic hypercapnia.
Our goal in this study was to determine if use of TGI might confer benefits in weaning from mechanical ventilation in patients who were difficult to wean and who had various diagnoses. Our findings indicate that the changes in ventilatory pattern induced by TGI could be beneficial for some patients. Potentially, TGI could assist patients to tolerate longer weaning trials and, ultimately, breathe with TGI alone. The insufflating gas could be delivered through a catheter placed in the tracheostomy tube (if needed for removal of secretions) or tracheostomy stoma, and the opening could be allowed to close through granulation. When no longer needed, the TGI device could be withdrawn. Thus, TGI might serve as a "bridge" to spontaneous ventilation.
Alternatively, the insufflating gas might be delivered by using existing equipment, such as the tubing of a "talking trach" adapter. With the cuff deflated, gas flow from the adapter would create an effect similar to the effect we tested. However, because gas would be delivered higher in the airway (adapter vs carina), less VDS would be available for washout of carbon dioxide, a factor that might preclude benefit. Nakos et al21 determined the effects of TGI when the catheter tip was placed at a proximal (34 cm into the tracheostomy tube) and at a distal (1 cm above the carina) position in the airway. Compared with the values during no flow, VT and Vmin Decreased significantly with TGI, but only when the catheter was in the distal position. Although these findings suggest this approach might not be effective, it merits testing because it eliminates the need for extra equipment.
An important issue in clinical use of TGI is the effect of this therapy on airway secretions. Most studies2527 of TGI were done in patients with end-stage lung disease. In these studies, "mucous balls," an accumulation of inspissated mucus that adheres to the catheter tip, caused infrequent, but serious, complications. If the mucus is not cleared, the mass can increase in size until it partially or totally obstructs the airway. One fatality caused by a mucous ball has been reported.28 Patients being weaned from mechanical ventilation most likely have more secretions than do patients with end-stage lung disease and therefore are at higher risk for this complication.29 Patients being weaned from mechanical ventilation are also likely to have a weak cough, making it more difficult to generate the glottic blast that dislodges mucous balls. Because of the risk of complications, the catheter should be removed from the tracheostomy tube every 8 to 12 hours to assess for the accumulation of mucus.30
Most studies of TGI in mechanically ventilated patients were short-term, and the investigators either did not report if the TGI gas was humidified or reported that a nonheated, dry gas was used.30 In 2 of 12 adults treated with mechanical ventilation who used TGI for 72 or fewer hours, catheter obstruction due to a mucous plug developed (at 58 and 67 hours) despite use of humidified gas.31 Both events were detected on the basis of whistling sounds emitting from the pressure-release valve on the humidifier, and no adverse sequela occurred. In another study32 in which humidified and warmed gas was used with TGI in 9 premature newborns for up to 31 days (mean 17 days), no problems due to formation of a mucous plug occurred. One difference between the gas-conditioning techniques used in these studies was that Danan et al32 used a heated humidifier, whereas Kuo et al31 humidified but did not heat the inspired gas.
Data on changes in the airway morphology after use of TGI are limited. Danan et al32 found no tracheal abnormalities at autopsy in 3 premature newborns who had received TGI for 5, 7, or 30 days. Christopher et al14 reported no abnormalities in 13 adults who had received transtracheal oxygen for a mean of 29 months (SD = 26 months) and were subsequently treated with oxygen nocturnally at a flow rate of 10 L/min for 3 months as part of a clinical trial. Nocturnally, gas at high flow rates was provided via a high-humidity oxygen enricher. In this study,14 bronchoscopic examination revealed no evidence of hemorrhage, exudates, ulceration, or necrosis before or after use of the higher flow rate. On the basis of the limited data available, TGI appears to cause no untoward damage to the airway.
Our study was subject to several limitations. The sample size was small, and post hoc analysis was used to identify responders and nonresponders to TGI. Our findings are therefore preliminary and should be tested in a prospective randomized trial. The patients most likely to benefit from TGI tended to have hypercapnia, as indicated by arterial blood gas analysis of blood samples obtained within 3 days of data collection when the patients were off mechanical ventilation. Our ability to fully evaluate a potential decrease in PaCO2 with TGI was limited by the use of noninvasive measures. Patients in our protocol were being weaned from prolonged mechanical ventilation and no longer had arterial catheters in place. We chose not to reinsert arterial catheters. To equalize airflow resistance between conditions (ie, TGI and no TGI), we positioned a catheter in the tracheostomy tube during both conditions. Therefore, we were able to analyze the effects of TGI independent of the effects due to airflow resistance. Our findings might have differed if the catheter had not been present during the no-flow condition. Finally, our study was designed to evaluate only the short-term response to TGI and therefore does not provide any information about the ability of this technique to facilitate weaning from mechanical ventilation.
In summary, use of TGI during a 2-hour T-piece trial produced changes consistent with a decrease in ventilatory demand in some but not all patients being weaned from prolonged mechanical ventilation. Responders, that is, patients most likely to benefit from TGI, were more likely than nonresponders to have a history of obstructive or restrictive lung disease and received mechanical ventilation for fewer days than nonresponders did. Nonresponders were more likely than responders to have an acute pulmonary process.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
To purchase reprints, contact The InnoVision Group, 101 Columbia, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656. Phone, (800) 809-2273 or (949) 362-2050 (ext 532); fax, (949) 362-2049; e-mail, reprints{at}aacn.org.
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |