Chest ACCP Member Benefits
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Article Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rasanen, J
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Rasanen, J

Chest, Vol 91, 225-229, Copyright © 1987 by American College of Chest Physicians


ARTICLES

Conventional and high frequency controlled mechanical ventilation in patients with left ventricular dysfunction and pulmonary edema

J Rasanen

The cardiopulmonary effects of conventional controlled mechanical ventilation (CMV), high frequency controlled mechanical ventilation (HFV), and intermittent mandatory ventilation (IMV) were compared in nine patients with ischemic left ventricular dysfunction and pulmonary edema. Ventilatory support during IMV and CMV was adjusted by changing the ventilator rate while tidal volume was maintained at 12 ml/kg. HFV was produced at a frequency of 100 cycles/min and an I/E ratio of 1:2. End-expiratory airway pressure and inspired oxygen concentration were maintained constant. The three ventilatory modes produced similar mean airway, transpulmonary, and intra-thoracic pressures. Mechanical control of respiration required hyperventilation during both CMV and HFV. Arterial blood oxygenation, heart rate, vascular pressures, cardiac output, and myocardial ischemia were unaffected by the changes in ventilation. Decreased arteriovenous oxygen content difference (p less than 0.05) and increased mixed venous oxygen content (p less than 0.05) suggested improved systemic blood flow during IMV. Controlled ventilation by conventional means or with a high frequency technique had no detectable advantage over partial ventilatory support with IMV during cardiopulmonary failure stabilized with vasoactive therapy and continuous positive airway pressure.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1987 by the American College of Chest Physicians.