[Pendelluft volume during double-triggered asynchronous breaths under pressure support ventilation: a prospective physiological study].

OBJECTIVE To investigate the relationship between double-triggering and abnormal movement of air in the lungs (pendelluft phenomenon) under pressure support ventilation (PSV). METHODS A prospective observational study was conducted, postoperative patients admitted to department of critical care medicine of Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University from April 1, 2019 to August 31, 2020 and received invasive mechanical ventilation with PSV mode were enrolled. Electrical impedance tomography (EIT) monitoring was performed. Airway pressure-time, flow-time, global and regional impedance-time curves were synchronously collected and analyzed offline. The volume of abnormal movement of air in the lungs at the beginning of inspiration was measured and defined as pendelluft volume. Double-triggered breaths were identified by trained researchers. Pendelluft volume during double-triggering was measured including the first triggered breath, the double-triggered breath, and the breath immediately following the double-triggered breath. Pendelluft volume was also measured for normal breath during the study. According to the frequency of double-triggering, patients were divided into severe (≥ 1 time/min) and non-severe double-triggering group. Pendelluft volume, parameters of respiratory mechanics, and clinical outcomes between the two groups were compared. RESULTS In 40 enrolled patients, a total of 9 711 breaths [(243±63) breaths/patient] were collected and analyzed, among which 222 breaths (2.3%) were identified as double-triggering. The Kappa of interobserver reliability to detect double-triggering was 0.964 [95% confidence interval (95%CI) was 0.946-0.982]. In 222 double-triggered breaths, pendelluft volume could not be measured in 7 breaths (3.2%), but the pendelluft phenomenon did exist as shown by opposite regional impedance change at the beginning of double-triggered inspiration. Finally, pendelluft volume was measured in 215 double-triggered breaths. Meanwhile, 400 normal breaths (10 normal breaths randomly selected for each patient) were identified as control. Compared with normal breath, pendelluft volume significantly increased in the first breath, the double-triggered breath, and the following normal breath [mL: 3.0 (1.4, 6.4), 8.3 (3.6, 13.2), 4.3 (1.9, 9.1) vs. 1.4 (0.7, 2.8), all P < 0.05]. Patients in severe double-triggering, pendelluft volume of normal breath and double-triggered breath were significantly higher than those in non-severe double-triggering group [mL: 1.8 (0.9, 3.2) vs. 1.1 (0.5, 2.1), P < 0.001; 8.5 (3.9, 13.4) vs. 2.0 (0.6, 9.1), P = 0.008]. Patients in severe double-triggering group had significantly higher respiratory rate than that in the non-severe double-triggering group (breaths/min: 20.9±3.5 vs. 15.2±3.7, P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in other respiratory mechanics parameters and main clinical outcomes between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS During PSV, the abnormal movement of air in the lungs (pendelluft phenomenon) was more likely to occur in double-triggering especially in double-triggered breath. The more frequent the double-triggering occurred, the more serious the pendelluft phenomenon was. A higher pendelluft volume of normal breath and a higher respiratory rate were related to severity of double-triggering.