• G Simonneau, F Lemaire, A Harf, J Carlet, and B Teisseire.
• Intensive Care Med. 1982 Mar 1; 8 (2): 61-7.

AbstractPositive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) produces cardiopulmonary effects whether administered by controlled positive pressure ventilation (CPPV) or continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). In eight patients with acute respiratory failure, the effects of 20 cm PEEP administered via CPPV and CPAP were compared. An esophageal balloon was used to calculate the transmural vascular pressures. The control values under mechanical ventilation with no PEEP (IPPV) for PaO2 and QS/QT (FiO2 being 1.0) were respectively 132 +/- 15 mmHg and 31 +/- 3%; CPPV gave a PaO2 of 369 +/- 27 mmHg and QS/QT fo 14 +/- 1.6%, CPAP 365 +/- 18 mmHg and 18 +/- 1.3% respectively. The two different modes of ventilation (CPPV and CPAP) gave identical blood gas improvement through the same level of end expiratory transpulmonary pressure despite marked differences between absolute mean airway and esophageal pressures. Conversely, hemodynamic tolerance was very different from one technique to the other: CPPV depressed cardiac index from 3.4 +/- 0.3 to 2.4 +/- 0.2 1/min/m2 as well as decreasing transmural filling pressures, suggesting a reduction in venous return. Conversely, filling pressures maintained at control values during CPAP and cardiac indexes were unchanged.

20 keywords...

hide…