English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

We compared positive pressure ventilation with pressure support ventilation at different levels of positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) using the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA). Forty-two anaesthetized adults (ASA 1-2, aged 19 to 63 years) underwent positive pressure ventilation and then pressure support ventilation each with PEEP set at 0, 5 and 10 cmH 2 O in random order. Pressure support ventilation was with the inspired tidal volume (VTInsp) set at 7 ml/kg and the respiratory rate adjusted to maintain the end-tidal CO 2  (ETCO 2 ) at 40 mmHg. Pressure support ventilation was with pressure support set at 5 cmH 2 O above PEEP and initiated when inspiration produced a 2 cmH 2 O reduction in airway pressure. Tidal volumes were similar during positive pressure and pressure support ventilation with PEEP, but were higher for the former without PEEP. Respiratory rate and peak inspiratory flow rate were higher during pressure support than positive pressure ventilation (all P&lt;0.001). Peak airway pressure (Ppaw), mean airway pressure (Mpaw), peak expiratory flow rate, and expired airway resistance were lower during pressure support than positive pressure ventilation (all P&lt;0.001). With PEEP set at 10 cmH 2 O, ETCO 2  was lower for pressure support than positive pressure ventilation. During positive pressure ventilation, there was an increase in Ppaw, Mpaw and dynamic compliance (Cdyn) with increasing levels of PEEP (all P&lt;0.01). During pressure support ventilation, there was an increase in inspired and expired tidal volume, Ppaw, peak inspiratory and expiratory flow rates and Cdyn, and a reduction in ETCO 2 , work of breathing, and expired airway resistance with increasing levels of PEEP (all P&lt;0.01). There were no differences in SpO 2 , non-invasive mean arterial pressure, heart rate or leak fraction. We conclude that pressure support ventilation provides equally effective gas exchange as positive pressure ventilation during PLMA anaesthesia with or without PEEP at the tested settings. During pressure support, PEEP increases ventilation and reduces work on breathing without increasing leak fraction.

Positive Pressure versus Pressure Support Ventilation at Different Levels of PEEP Using the ProSeal™ Laryngeal Mask Airway

Positive Pressure versus Pressure Support Ventilation at Different Levels of PEEP Using the ProSeal^™ Laryngeal Mask Airway