Background: Sigh is a cyclic brief recruitment maneuver: previous physiologic studies showed that its use could be an interesting addition to pressure support ventilation to improve lung elastance, decrease regional heterogeneity, and increase release of surfactant. Research question: Is the clinical application of sigh during pressure support ventilation (PSV) feasible? Study design and methods: We conducted a multicenter noninferiority randomized clinical trial on adult intubated patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure or ARDS undergoing PSV. Patients were randomized to the no-sigh group and treated by PSV alone, or to the sigh group, treated by PSV plus sigh (increase in airway pressure to 30 cm H2O for 3 s once per minute) until day 28 or death or successful spontaneous breathing trial. The primary end point of the study was feasibility, assessed as noninferiority (5% tolerance) in the proportion of patients failing assisted ventilation. Secondary outcomes included safety, physiologic parameters in the first week from randomization, 28-day mortality, and ventilator-free days. Results: Two-hundred and fifty-eight patients (31% women; median age, 65 [54-75] years) were enrolled. In the sigh group, 23% of patients failed to remain on assisted ventilation vs 30% in the no-sigh group (absolute difference, -7%; 95% CI, -18% to 4%; P = .015 for noninferiority). Adverse events occurred in 12% vs 13% in the sigh vs no-sigh group (P = .852). Oxygenation was improved whereas tidal volume, respiratory rate, and corrected minute ventilation were lower over the first 7 days from randomization in the sigh vs no-sigh group. There was no significant difference in terms of mortality (16% vs 21%; P = .337) and ventilator-free days (22 [7-26] vs 22 [3-25] days; P = .300) for the sigh vs no-sigh group. Interpretation: Among hypoxemic intubated ICU patients, application of sigh was feasible and without increased risk.

Sigh in Patients With Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure and ARDS: The PROTECTION Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial

Volta CA;Spadaro S;Pelosi P;Pesenti A
2021

Abstract

Background: Sigh is a cyclic brief recruitment maneuver: previous physiologic studies showed that its use could be an interesting addition to pressure support ventilation to improve lung elastance, decrease regional heterogeneity, and increase release of surfactant. Research question: Is the clinical application of sigh during pressure support ventilation (PSV) feasible? Study design and methods: We conducted a multicenter noninferiority randomized clinical trial on adult intubated patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure or ARDS undergoing PSV. Patients were randomized to the no-sigh group and treated by PSV alone, or to the sigh group, treated by PSV plus sigh (increase in airway pressure to 30 cm H2O for 3 s once per minute) until day 28 or death or successful spontaneous breathing trial. The primary end point of the study was feasibility, assessed as noninferiority (5% tolerance) in the proportion of patients failing assisted ventilation. Secondary outcomes included safety, physiologic parameters in the first week from randomization, 28-day mortality, and ventilator-free days. Results: Two-hundred and fifty-eight patients (31% women; median age, 65 [54-75] years) were enrolled. In the sigh group, 23% of patients failed to remain on assisted ventilation vs 30% in the no-sigh group (absolute difference, -7%; 95% CI, -18% to 4%; P = .015 for noninferiority). Adverse events occurred in 12% vs 13% in the sigh vs no-sigh group (P = .852). Oxygenation was improved whereas tidal volume, respiratory rate, and corrected minute ventilation were lower over the first 7 days from randomization in the sigh vs no-sigh group. There was no significant difference in terms of mortality (16% vs 21%; P = .337) and ventilator-free days (22 [7-26] vs 22 [3-25] days; P = .300) for the sigh vs no-sigh group. Interpretation: Among hypoxemic intubated ICU patients, application of sigh was feasible and without increased risk.
2021
Mauri, T; Foti, G; Fornari, C; Grasselli, G; Pinciroli, R; Lovisari, F; Tubiolo, D; Volta, Ca; Spadaro, S; Rona, R; Rondelli, E; Navalesi, P; Garofalo, E; Knafelj, R; Gorjup, V; Colombo, R; Cortegiani, A; Zhou, Jx; D'Andrea, R; Calamai, I; Vidal González, Á; Roca, O; Grieco, Dl; Jovaisa, T; Bampalis, D; Becher, T; Battaglini, D; Ge, H; Luz, M; Constantin, Jm; Ranieri, M; Guerin, C; Mancebo, J; Pelosi, P; Fumagalli, R; Brochard, L; Pesenti, A
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
SIGH manuscript.pdf

accesso aperto

Descrizione: Full text editoriale
Tipologia: Full text (versione editoriale)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 291.1 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
291.1 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in SFERA sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11392/2470459
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 12
  • Scopus 16
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 10
social impact