Skip to main content

Table 3 Evolution of the respiratory and gazometric parameters during the study

From: Right over left ventricular end-diastolic area relevance to predict hemodynamic intolerance of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation in patients with severe ARDS

  CMVpre HFOV connection H1 HFOV H3 HFOV
Concerned patients number 24 24 23 19
mPaw (cm H2O) 19 ± 3b,c,d 29 ± 1a 28 ± 1a 29 ± 1a
Frequency (Hz) NA 6.0 ± 0.0d 6.0 ± 0.0d 5.2 ± 1.3b,c
Amplitude (cm H2O) NA 88 ± 13 86 ± 12 85 ± 12
Pressure amplitude of oscillation (%) NA 80 ± 0 79 ± 4 79 ± 5
pH 7.24 ± 0.14d NA 7.25 ± 0.16 7.30 ± 0.17a
PaCO2 (mmHg) 53 ± 15d NA 49 ± 19a 47 ± 15a
Bicarbonate (mmol L−1) 24 ± 5 NA 23 ± 6 24 ± 4
Base excess (mmol L−1) −6 ± 6d NA −6 ± 7d −4 ± 5a,c
P/F ratio 89 ± 23c,d NA 171 ± 106a 177 ± 96a
OI 26 ± 8d NA 26 ± 17d 23 ± 15a,c
ELWI (mL/kg PBW) 19 ± 7 19 ± 7 19 ± 7 17 ± 6
PVPI 5.1 ± 1.7 5.2 ± 1.8 5.1 ± 1.5 5.1 ± 1.7
  1. Results are given as mean ± SD
  2. CMV conventional mechanical ventilation, HFOV high frequency oscillation ventilation, mPaw mean airway pressure, FiO 2 fraction of inspired oxygen, P/F ratio of arterial oxygen concentration to the fraction of inspired oxygen, OI oxygenation index calculated as (mean airway pressure × FiO2)/PaO2, ELWI extravascular lung water index, PBW predicted body weight, PVPI pulmonary vascular permeability index
  3. a p < 0.05 for all data as compared to CMVpre
  4. b p < 0.05 for all data as compared to HFOV connection
  5. c p < 0.05 for all data as compared to H1 HFOV
  6. d p < 0.05 for all data as compared to H3 HFOV