Skip to main content

The effect of triggering type on post-triggering pressure variations during pressure support ventilation: a simplified surrogate for dyssynchrony

Abstract

Context

Several studies comparing flow and pressure triggering using invasive and noninvasive techniques have mostly focused on the trigger phase and favored flow triggering. Recently, there have been advancements in the technology of pressure triggering to improve its performance.

Aims

We sought to evaluate the effect of triggering type in old and new ventilators on patient’s synchrony in the post-trigger phase using variations in airway pressures with the set inspiratory pressure as a surrogate for dyssynchrony.

Patients and methods

Using three different ventilator types, 32 patients on pressure support ventilation were set on the two triggering types (at the same equivalent levels), each for 1 h, with all other ventilatory setting kept constant. At the end of the hour on each trigger mode, the measured peak pressure and its difference with the set inspiratory pressure [delta pressure (ΔP)], the mean airway pressure, and different ventilatory parameters and arterial blood gases were assessed.

Results

Pressure triggering resulted in a significantly higher peak pressure, ΔP, and lower dynamic compliance at any equivalent sensitivity and pressure support regardless of the level (<0.05). Moreover, at higher sensitivity levels (3 cmH2O and l/min), flow triggering produced higher mean airway pressures and oxygenation (<0.05). However, there was no significant difference as regards tidal volume, minute volume, frequency, rapid shallow breathing index, or PCO2.

Conclusion

Despite advances in pressure-triggering technology, flow triggering results in less pressure variation and better patient’s synchrony during pressure support ventilation; in this respect, ΔP and dynamic compliance are simple noninvasive measures for dyssynchrony.

References

  1. Murias G, Lucangelo U, Blanch L. Patient-ventilator asynchrony. Curr Opin Crit Care 2016; 22:53–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Murias G, Villagra A, Blanch L. Patient-ventilator dyssynchrony during assisted invasive mechanical ventilation. Minerva Anestesiol 2013; 79:434–444.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Thille AW, Rodriguez P, Cabello B, Lellouche F, Brochard L. Patient-ventilator asynchrony during assisted mechanical ventilation. Intensive Care Med 2006; 32:1515–1522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Mellott KG, Grap MJ, Munro CL, Sessler CN, Wetzel PA, Nilsestuen JO, et al. Patient ventilator asynchrony in critically ill adults: frequency and types. Heart Lung 2014; 43:231–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Goulet R, Hess D, Kacmarek RM. Pressure vs flow triggering during pressure support ventilation. Chest 1997; 111:1649–1653.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Blanch L, Sales B, Fernandez R, Garcia-Esquirol O, Estruga A, Chacon E, et al. Clinical application of a computerized alarm system for mechanically ventilated patients. A pilot study. Intensive Care Med 2010; 36:S111.

  7. Garcia-Esquirol O, Sales B, Montanya J, Chacon E, Estruga A, Borelli M, et al. Validation of an automatic continuous system to detect expiratory asynchronies during mechanical ventilation. Intensive Care Med 2010; 36: S349.

  8. Blanch L, Villagra A, Sales B, Montanya J, Lucangelo U, Lujan M, et al. Asynchronies during mechanical ventilation are associated with mortality. Intensive Care Med 2015; 41:633–641.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Estruga A, Chacon E, Sales B, Montanya J, Jam R, Garcia-Esquirol O, et al. Nursing detection of expiratory patient-ventilator asynchronies during mechanical ventilation. Intensive Care Med 2010; 36:S342.

  10. Aslanian P, El Atrous S, Isabey D, Valente E, Corsi D, Harf A, et al. Effects of flow triggering on breathing effort during partial ventilatory support. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1998; 157:135–143.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Branson RD, Campbell RS, Davis K, Johnson DJ. Comparison of pressure and flow triggering systems during continuous positive airway pressure. Chest 1994; 106:540–544.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Polese G, Massara A, Poggi R, Brandolese R, Brandi G, Rossi A. Flow-triggering reduces inspiratory effort during weaning from mechanical ventilation. Intensive Care Med 1995; 21:682–686.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Sassoon CS, Gruer SE. Characteristics of the ventilator pressure- and flow-trigger variables. Intensive Care Med 1995; 21:159–168.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Tütüncü AS, Cakar N, Camci E, Esen F, Telci L, Akpir K. Comparison of pressure- and flow-triggered pressure-support ventilation on weaning parameters in patients recovering from acute respiratory failure. Crit Care Med 1997; 25:756–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Sharshar T, Desmarais G, Louis B, Macadou G, Porcher R, Harf A, et al. Transdiaphragmatic pressure control of airway pressure support in healthy subjects. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2003; 168:760–769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mauri T, Yoshida T, Bellani G, Goligher EC, Carteaux G, Rittayamai N, et al. Esophageal and transpulmonary pressure in the clinical setting: meaning, usefulness and perspectives. Intensive Care Med 2016; 42:1360–1373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Akoumianaki E, Maggiore SM, Valenza F, Bellani G, Jubran A, Loring SH, et al. The application of esophageal pressure measurement in patients with respiratory failure. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2014; 189:520–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Nava S, Bruschi C, Fracchia C, Braschi A, Rubini F. Patient-ventilator interaction and inspiratory effort during pressure support ventilation in patients with different pathologies. Eur Respir J 1997; 10:177–183.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Wu XY, Huang YZ, Yang Y, Liu SQ, Liu HG, Qiu HB. Effects of neurally adjusted ventilatory assist on patient-ventilator synchrony in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Zhonghua Jie He He Hu Xi Za Zhi 2009; 32:508–512.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Barrera R, Melendez J, Ahdoot M, Huang Y, Leung D, Groeger JS. Flow triggering added to pressure support ventilation improves comfort and reduces work of breathing in mechanically ventilated patients. J Crit Care 1999; 14:172–176.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Khalil MM, ElFattah N, El-Shafey M, Riad MN, Aid AR, Anany MA. Flow versus pressure triggering in mechanically ventilated acute respiratory failure patients. Egypt J Bronchol 2015 9;192–210.

  22. Giuliani R, Mascia L, Recchia F, Caracciolo A, Fiore T, Ranieri VM. Patient-ventilator interaction during synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation. Effects of flow triggering. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1995; 151:1–9.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Saito S, Tokioka H, Kosaka F. Efficacy of flow-by during continuous positive airway pressure ventilation. Crit Care Med 1990; 18:654–656.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Al-Najjar MMH, Fahmy TS, Al-Shafee MA, Al-Atroush HH, Mokhtar S. The effect of triggering type on post triggering pressure variations during pressure support ventilation; a simplified surrogate for dys-synchrony. Intensive Care Med 2013; 39:S251.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Ranieri VM, Mascia L, Petruzzelli V, Bruno F, Brienza A, Giuliani R. Inspiratory effort and measurement of dynamic intrinsic PEEP in COPD patients: effects of ventilator triggering systems. Intensive Care Med 1995; 21:896–903.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Chiumello D, Carlesso E, Brioni M, Cressoni M. Airway driving pressure and lung stress in ARDS patients. Crit Care 2016; 20:276

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tamer S. Fahmy MD, PhD.

Additional information

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work noncommercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

Rights and permissions

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Al-Najjar, M.M.H., Fahmy, T.S., Al-Shafee, M.A. et al. The effect of triggering type on post-triggering pressure variations during pressure support ventilation: a simplified surrogate for dyssynchrony. Egypt J Bronchol 12, 41–48 (2018). https://doi.org/10.4103/ejb.ejb_10_17

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/ejb.ejb_10_17

Key words

  • dynamic compliance
  • flow triggering
  • patient–ventilator synchrony
  • post-trigger pressure variation
  • pressure support ventilation
  • pressure triggering