To investigate the relationship between lung anatomy and pulmonary mechanics in acute respiratory failure (ARF), 20 patients with ARF underwent computerized tomography (CT) at 3 levels of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) (5, 10, and 15 cm H2O). The static pressure-volume curve of the total respiratory system and the lung volumes (helium dilution method) were also measured. By knowing the lung volumes and analyzing the CT number frequency distribution, a quantitative estimate of normally aerated, poorly aerated, and nonaerated lung tissue was obtained at each level of PEEP. The recruitment was defined as the percent increase of normally aerated tissue from 5 to 15 cm H2O. We found that the different compliances (starting compliance, inflation compliance, and deflation compliance) were correlated only with the amount of normally aerated tissue present in the range of pressures explored by a given compliance (5 cm H2O for starting compliance and 15 cm H2O for inflation and deflation compliances). No relationship was found between the compliances and the poorly aerated and nonaerated tissue. The specific compliance was in the normal range, whereas the amount of recruitment was related to the ratio of inflation compliance to starting compliance. Our data suggest that (1) the pressure-volume curve parameters in ARF investigate only the residual healthy zones of the lung and do not directly estimate the "amount" of disease (poorly or nonaerated tissue), (2) the pressure-volume curve may allow an estimate of the anatomic recruitment, and (3) the residual normally aerated zones of the ARF lung seem to maintain a normal intrinsic elasticity.

No abstract

No abstract

The impact of a new therapy that includes pressure-controlled inverse ratio ventilation followed by extracorporeal CO2 removal on the survival of patients with severe ARDS was evaluated in a randomized controlled clinical trial. Computerized protocols generated around-the-clock instructions for management of arterial oxygenation to assure equivalent intensity of care for patients randomized to the new therapy limb and those randomized to the control, mechanical ventilation limb. We randomized 40 patients with severe ARDS who met the ECMO entry criteria. The main outcome measure was survival at 30 days after randomization. Survival was not significantly different in the 19 mechanical ventilation (42%) and 21 new therapy (extracorporeal) (33%) patients (p = 0.8). All deaths occurred within 30 days of randomization. Overall patient survival was 38% (15 of 40) and was about four times that expected from historical data (p = 0.0002). Extracorporeal treatment group survival was not significantly different from other published survival rates after extracorporeal CO2 removal. Mechanical ventilation patient group survival was significantly higher than the 12% derived from published data (p = 0.0001). Protocols controlled care 86% of the time. Average PaO2 was 59 mm Hg in both treatment groups. Intensity of care required to maintain arterial oxygenation was similar in both groups (2.6 and 2.6 PEEP changes/day; 4.3 and 5.0 FIO2 changes/day). We conclude that there was no significant difference in survival between the mechanical ventilation and the extracorporeal CO2 removal groups. We do not recommend extracorporeal support as a therapy for ARDS. Extracorporeal support for ARDS should be restricted to controlled clinical trials.

Infections (especially ventilator-associated pneumonia) during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy are common and frequently involve multidrug-resistant organisms. In addition, they have a negative impact on patients' outcomes.