Hemodynamic Differences Between Continual Positive and Two Types of Negative Pressure Ventilation

Am Rev Respir Dis. 1992 Sep;146(3):677-80. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm/146.3.677.

Abstract

In seven anesthetized dogs, ventilated with matching lung volumes, tidal volumes, and respiratory rates, we compared the effects on cardiac output (CO), arterial venous oxygen saturation difference (SaO2 - SVO2), and femoral and inferior vena cava pressure (1) intermittent positive pressure ventilation with positive end-expiratory pressure (CPPV); (2) iron-lung ventilation with negative end-expiratory pressure (ILV-NEEP); (3) grid and wrap ventilation with NEEP applied to the thorax and upper abdomen (G&W-NEEP). The values of CO and SaO2 - SVO2 with ILV-NEEP were similar to those with CPPV. However, with G&W-NEEP as compared with ILV-NEEP, mean CO was greater (2.9 versus 2.6 L/min, p = 0.02) and mean (SaO2 - SVO2) was lower (26.6% versus 28.3%, p = NS). Mean PFEM-IVC was higher with G&W-NEEP than with the other types of ventilation. We conclude that (1) ILV-NEEP is hemodynamically equivalent to CPPV and (2) G&W-NEEP has less adverse hemodynamic consequences. has less adverse hemodynamic consequences.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Animals
  • Blood Gas Analysis
  • Dogs
  • Evaluation Studies as Topic
  • Functional Residual Capacity
  • Hemodynamics*
  • Monitoring, Physiologic / methods
  • Positive-Pressure Respiration / instrumentation*
  • Tidal Volume
  • Ventilators, Negative-Pressure*