Effect of mechanical ventilation versus spontaneous breathing on abdominal edema and inflammation in ARDS: an experimental porcine model
Abstract Background Mechanical ventilation (MV), compared to spontaneous breathing (SB), has been found to increase abdominal edema and inflammation in experimental sepsis. Our hypothesis was that in primary acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) MV would enhance inflammation and edema in the ab...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
BMC
2020-04-01
|
Series: | BMC Pulmonary Medicine |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12890-020-1138-6 |
id |
doaj-a0f67ebc15a34f0289cc4b2e5d98f894 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-a0f67ebc15a34f0289cc4b2e5d98f8942020-11-25T02:59:50ZengBMCBMC Pulmonary Medicine1471-24662020-04-0120111110.1186/s12890-020-1138-6Effect of mechanical ventilation versus spontaneous breathing on abdominal edema and inflammation in ARDS: an experimental porcine modelSilvia Marchesi0Göran Hedenstierna1Aki Hata2Ricardo Feinstein3Anders Larsson4Anders Olof Larsson5Miklós Lipcsey6Hedenstierna Laboratory, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala UniversityDepartment of Medical Sciences, Clinical Physiology, Uppsala UniversityHedenstierna Laboratory, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala UniversityNational Veterinary InstituteHedenstierna Laboratory, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala UniversitySection of Clinical Chemistry, Department of Medical Sciences, Uppsala UniversityHedenstierna Laboratory, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala UniversityAbstract Background Mechanical ventilation (MV), compared to spontaneous breathing (SB), has been found to increase abdominal edema and inflammation in experimental sepsis. Our hypothesis was that in primary acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) MV would enhance inflammation and edema in the abdomen. Methods Thirteen piglets were randomized into two groups (SB and MV) after the induction of ARDS by lung lavage and 1 h of injurious ventilation. 1. SB: continuous positive airway pressure 15 cmH2O, fraction of inspired oxygen (FIO2) 0.5 and respiratory rate (RR) maintained at about 40 cycles min− 1 by titrating remifentanil infusion. 2. MV: volume control, tidal volume 6 ml kg− 1, positive end-expiratory pressure 15 cmH2O, RR 40 cycles min− 1, FIO2 0.5. Main outcomes: abdominal edema, assessed by tissues histopathology and wet-dry weight; abdominal inflammation, assessed by cytokine concentration in tissues, blood and ascites, and tissue histopathology. Results The groups did not show significant differences in hemodynamic or respiratory parameters. Moreover, edema and inflammation in the abdominal organs were similar. However, blood IL6 increased in the MV group in all vascular beds (p < 0.001). In addition, TNFα ratio in blood increased through the lungs in MV group (+ 26% ± 3) but decreased in the SB group (− 17% ± 3). Conclusions There were no differences between the MV and SB group for abdominal edema or inflammation. However, the systemic increase in IL6 and the TNFα increase through the lungs suggest that MV, in this model, was harmful to the lungs.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12890-020-1138-6ARDSMechanical ventilationSpontaneous ventilationCytokinesEdemaAbdominal inflammation |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Silvia Marchesi Göran Hedenstierna Aki Hata Ricardo Feinstein Anders Larsson Anders Olof Larsson Miklós Lipcsey |
spellingShingle |
Silvia Marchesi Göran Hedenstierna Aki Hata Ricardo Feinstein Anders Larsson Anders Olof Larsson Miklós Lipcsey Effect of mechanical ventilation versus spontaneous breathing on abdominal edema and inflammation in ARDS: an experimental porcine model BMC Pulmonary Medicine ARDS Mechanical ventilation Spontaneous ventilation Cytokines Edema Abdominal inflammation |
author_facet |
Silvia Marchesi Göran Hedenstierna Aki Hata Ricardo Feinstein Anders Larsson Anders Olof Larsson Miklós Lipcsey |
author_sort |
Silvia Marchesi |
title |
Effect of mechanical ventilation versus spontaneous breathing on abdominal edema and inflammation in ARDS: an experimental porcine model |
title_short |
Effect of mechanical ventilation versus spontaneous breathing on abdominal edema and inflammation in ARDS: an experimental porcine model |
title_full |
Effect of mechanical ventilation versus spontaneous breathing on abdominal edema and inflammation in ARDS: an experimental porcine model |
title_fullStr |
Effect of mechanical ventilation versus spontaneous breathing on abdominal edema and inflammation in ARDS: an experimental porcine model |
title_full_unstemmed |
Effect of mechanical ventilation versus spontaneous breathing on abdominal edema and inflammation in ARDS: an experimental porcine model |
title_sort |
effect of mechanical ventilation versus spontaneous breathing on abdominal edema and inflammation in ards: an experimental porcine model |
publisher |
BMC |
series |
BMC Pulmonary Medicine |
issn |
1471-2466 |
publishDate |
2020-04-01 |
description |
Abstract Background Mechanical ventilation (MV), compared to spontaneous breathing (SB), has been found to increase abdominal edema and inflammation in experimental sepsis. Our hypothesis was that in primary acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) MV would enhance inflammation and edema in the abdomen. Methods Thirteen piglets were randomized into two groups (SB and MV) after the induction of ARDS by lung lavage and 1 h of injurious ventilation. 1. SB: continuous positive airway pressure 15 cmH2O, fraction of inspired oxygen (FIO2) 0.5 and respiratory rate (RR) maintained at about 40 cycles min− 1 by titrating remifentanil infusion. 2. MV: volume control, tidal volume 6 ml kg− 1, positive end-expiratory pressure 15 cmH2O, RR 40 cycles min− 1, FIO2 0.5. Main outcomes: abdominal edema, assessed by tissues histopathology and wet-dry weight; abdominal inflammation, assessed by cytokine concentration in tissues, blood and ascites, and tissue histopathology. Results The groups did not show significant differences in hemodynamic or respiratory parameters. Moreover, edema and inflammation in the abdominal organs were similar. However, blood IL6 increased in the MV group in all vascular beds (p < 0.001). In addition, TNFα ratio in blood increased through the lungs in MV group (+ 26% ± 3) but decreased in the SB group (− 17% ± 3). Conclusions There were no differences between the MV and SB group for abdominal edema or inflammation. However, the systemic increase in IL6 and the TNFα increase through the lungs suggest that MV, in this model, was harmful to the lungs. |
topic |
ARDS Mechanical ventilation Spontaneous ventilation Cytokines Edema Abdominal inflammation |
url |
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12890-020-1138-6 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT silviamarchesi effectofmechanicalventilationversusspontaneousbreathingonabdominaledemaandinflammationinardsanexperimentalporcinemodel AT goranhedenstierna effectofmechanicalventilationversusspontaneousbreathingonabdominaledemaandinflammationinardsanexperimentalporcinemodel AT akihata effectofmechanicalventilationversusspontaneousbreathingonabdominaledemaandinflammationinardsanexperimentalporcinemodel AT ricardofeinstein effectofmechanicalventilationversusspontaneousbreathingonabdominaledemaandinflammationinardsanexperimentalporcinemodel AT anderslarsson effectofmechanicalventilationversusspontaneousbreathingonabdominaledemaandinflammationinardsanexperimentalporcinemodel AT andersoloflarsson effectofmechanicalventilationversusspontaneousbreathingonabdominaledemaandinflammationinardsanexperimentalporcinemodel AT mikloslipcsey effectofmechanicalventilationversusspontaneousbreathingonabdominaledemaandinflammationinardsanexperimentalporcinemodel |
_version_ |
1724700835895574528 |