A re-evaluation of the hemodynamic consequences of intermittent positive pressure ventilation

J. L. Robotham, D. Cherry, Wayne A Mitzner, J. L. Rabson, W. Lixfeld, B. Bromberger-Barnea

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The hemodynamic effects of intermittent positive pressure ventilation (IPPV) have generally been considered straightforward, being dominated by the inspiratory reduction in systemic venous return. Paradoxically, there is considerable debate regarding the effects of PEEP. We have studied both right ventricular (RV) and left ventricular (LV) performance during a single IPPV respiratory cycle in dogs with intact circulatory systems or the right heart bypassed in open and closed chest conditions. We have found that the 'reverse pulsus paradoxus' during inspiration reflects both transmission of the increased intrathoracic pressure to the thoracic aorta and an increase in LV stroke volume (SV). This inspiratory increase in LVSV has been found to be influenced by, but not dependent on: a) respiratory variations in RVSV; b) variations in functional residual capacity or tidal volume altering pulmonary venous return and the degree of physical compression of the heart by the lungs; c) an inspiratory decrease in RV volume, increasing LV diastolic compliance and, thus, probably improving pulmonary venous return; d) a decreased transmural aortic diastole pressure reflecting an effective decrease in LV afterload produced by both the general increase in intrathoracic pressure and the direct compression of the heart; and e) variations in the pulmonary vascular volume as indicated by changes in the transmural LV end-diastolic pressure. An understanding of IPPV during a single respiratory cycle facilitates an appreciation of the steady state hemodynamic effects of IPPV with or without PEEP. Our results imply that measurements made only at end-expiration, ignoring inspiratory events, may have serious limitations. Furthermore, they suggest that IPPV with PEEP should be evaluated as a form of LV assist in LV failure.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)783-793
Number of pages11
JournalCritical Care Medicine
Volume11
Issue number10
StatePublished - 1983
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Intermittent Positive-Pressure Ventilation
Hemodynamics
Lung
Functional Residual Capacity
Pressure
Residual Volume
Diastole
Tidal Volume
Cardiovascular System
Thoracic Aorta
Stroke Volume
Compliance
Blood Vessels
Pulse
Arterial Pressure
Thorax
Dogs
Blood Pressure

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Cite this

Robotham, J. L., Cherry, D., Mitzner, W. A., Rabson, J. L., Lixfeld, W., & Bromberger-Barnea, B. (1983). A re-evaluation of the hemodynamic consequences of intermittent positive pressure ventilation. Critical Care Medicine, 11(10), 783-793.

A re-evaluation of the hemodynamic consequences of intermittent positive pressure ventilation. / Robotham, J. L.; Cherry, D.; Mitzner, Wayne A; Rabson, J. L.; Lixfeld, W.; Bromberger-Barnea, B.

In: Critical Care Medicine, Vol. 11, No. 10, 1983, p. 783-793.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Robotham, JL, Cherry, D, Mitzner, WA, Rabson, JL, Lixfeld, W & Bromberger-Barnea, B 1983, 'A re-evaluation of the hemodynamic consequences of intermittent positive pressure ventilation', Critical Care Medicine, vol. 11, no. 10, pp. 783-793.
Robotham JL, Cherry D, Mitzner WA, Rabson JL, Lixfeld W, Bromberger-Barnea B. A re-evaluation of the hemodynamic consequences of intermittent positive pressure ventilation. Critical Care Medicine. 1983;11(10):783-793.
Robotham, J. L. ; Cherry, D. ; Mitzner, Wayne A ; Rabson, J. L. ; Lixfeld, W. ; Bromberger-Barnea, B. / A re-evaluation of the hemodynamic consequences of intermittent positive pressure ventilation. In: Critical Care Medicine. 1983 ; Vol. 11, No. 10. pp. 783-793.
@article{83d93f777b6646a18be49db534966624,
title = "A re-evaluation of the hemodynamic consequences of intermittent positive pressure ventilation",
abstract = "The hemodynamic effects of intermittent positive pressure ventilation (IPPV) have generally been considered straightforward, being dominated by the inspiratory reduction in systemic venous return. Paradoxically, there is considerable debate regarding the effects of PEEP. We have studied both right ventricular (RV) and left ventricular (LV) performance during a single IPPV respiratory cycle in dogs with intact circulatory systems or the right heart bypassed in open and closed chest conditions. We have found that the 'reverse pulsus paradoxus' during inspiration reflects both transmission of the increased intrathoracic pressure to the thoracic aorta and an increase in LV stroke volume (SV). This inspiratory increase in LVSV has been found to be influenced by, but not dependent on: a) respiratory variations in RVSV; b) variations in functional residual capacity or tidal volume altering pulmonary venous return and the degree of physical compression of the heart by the lungs; c) an inspiratory decrease in RV volume, increasing LV diastolic compliance and, thus, probably improving pulmonary venous return; d) a decreased transmural aortic diastole pressure reflecting an effective decrease in LV afterload produced by both the general increase in intrathoracic pressure and the direct compression of the heart; and e) variations in the pulmonary vascular volume as indicated by changes in the transmural LV end-diastolic pressure. An understanding of IPPV during a single respiratory cycle facilitates an appreciation of the steady state hemodynamic effects of IPPV with or without PEEP. Our results imply that measurements made only at end-expiration, ignoring inspiratory events, may have serious limitations. Furthermore, they suggest that IPPV with PEEP should be evaluated as a form of LV assist in LV failure.",
author = "Robotham, {J. L.} and D. Cherry and Mitzner, {Wayne A} and Rabson, {J. L.} and W. Lixfeld and B. Bromberger-Barnea",
year = "1983",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "11",
pages = "783--793",
journal = "Critical Care Medicine",
issn = "0090-3493",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A re-evaluation of the hemodynamic consequences of intermittent positive pressure ventilation

AU - Robotham, J. L.

AU - Cherry, D.

AU - Mitzner, Wayne A

AU - Rabson, J. L.

AU - Lixfeld, W.

AU - Bromberger-Barnea, B.

PY - 1983

Y1 - 1983

N2 - The hemodynamic effects of intermittent positive pressure ventilation (IPPV) have generally been considered straightforward, being dominated by the inspiratory reduction in systemic venous return. Paradoxically, there is considerable debate regarding the effects of PEEP. We have studied both right ventricular (RV) and left ventricular (LV) performance during a single IPPV respiratory cycle in dogs with intact circulatory systems or the right heart bypassed in open and closed chest conditions. We have found that the 'reverse pulsus paradoxus' during inspiration reflects both transmission of the increased intrathoracic pressure to the thoracic aorta and an increase in LV stroke volume (SV). This inspiratory increase in LVSV has been found to be influenced by, but not dependent on: a) respiratory variations in RVSV; b) variations in functional residual capacity or tidal volume altering pulmonary venous return and the degree of physical compression of the heart by the lungs; c) an inspiratory decrease in RV volume, increasing LV diastolic compliance and, thus, probably improving pulmonary venous return; d) a decreased transmural aortic diastole pressure reflecting an effective decrease in LV afterload produced by both the general increase in intrathoracic pressure and the direct compression of the heart; and e) variations in the pulmonary vascular volume as indicated by changes in the transmural LV end-diastolic pressure. An understanding of IPPV during a single respiratory cycle facilitates an appreciation of the steady state hemodynamic effects of IPPV with or without PEEP. Our results imply that measurements made only at end-expiration, ignoring inspiratory events, may have serious limitations. Furthermore, they suggest that IPPV with PEEP should be evaluated as a form of LV assist in LV failure.

AB - The hemodynamic effects of intermittent positive pressure ventilation (IPPV) have generally been considered straightforward, being dominated by the inspiratory reduction in systemic venous return. Paradoxically, there is considerable debate regarding the effects of PEEP. We have studied both right ventricular (RV) and left ventricular (LV) performance during a single IPPV respiratory cycle in dogs with intact circulatory systems or the right heart bypassed in open and closed chest conditions. We have found that the 'reverse pulsus paradoxus' during inspiration reflects both transmission of the increased intrathoracic pressure to the thoracic aorta and an increase in LV stroke volume (SV). This inspiratory increase in LVSV has been found to be influenced by, but not dependent on: a) respiratory variations in RVSV; b) variations in functional residual capacity or tidal volume altering pulmonary venous return and the degree of physical compression of the heart by the lungs; c) an inspiratory decrease in RV volume, increasing LV diastolic compliance and, thus, probably improving pulmonary venous return; d) a decreased transmural aortic diastole pressure reflecting an effective decrease in LV afterload produced by both the general increase in intrathoracic pressure and the direct compression of the heart; and e) variations in the pulmonary vascular volume as indicated by changes in the transmural LV end-diastolic pressure. An understanding of IPPV during a single respiratory cycle facilitates an appreciation of the steady state hemodynamic effects of IPPV with or without PEEP. Our results imply that measurements made only at end-expiration, ignoring inspiratory events, may have serious limitations. Furthermore, they suggest that IPPV with PEEP should be evaluated as a form of LV assist in LV failure.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0020521098&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0020521098&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 6352172

AN - SCOPUS:0020521098

VL - 11

SP - 783

EP - 793

JO - Critical Care Medicine

JF - Critical Care Medicine

SN - 0090-3493

IS - 10

ER -