Advertisement

The IMV Controversy: Full VS Partial Ventilatory Support

  • B. A. Shapiro
Conference paper
Part of the Anaesthesiologie und Intensivmedizin / Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine book series (A+I, volume 167)

Abstract

Following World War 2, the design of most positive pressure ventilators was such that the patient was unable to spontaneously breathe and ventilation was totally controlled by the machine. Such control mode ventilation (CMV) often required heavy sedation and paralysis to stabilize cardio-pulmonary function. The development of assist mode ventilation (AMV) allowed the patient to initiate the positive pressure breaths and in most circumstances required less sedation and paralysis. With both CMV and AMV, the ventilator provides all the energy required to maintain effective alveolar ventilation — a circumstance that may be termed “full ventilatory support”.

Keywords

Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Tidal Volume Ventilatory Support Positive Pressure Ventilator Adult Respiratory Distress Syndrome 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Downs JB, Perkins HM, Modell JH (1974) Intermittent mandatory ventilation. An Evaluation 109: 519–523Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ashbaugh DG, Petty TL, Bigelow DB et al (1969) Continuous positive pressure breathing (CPPB) in adult respiratory distress syndrome. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 57:31–41PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Suter PM, Fairley HB, Isenberg MD (1975) Optimum end-expiratory airway pressure in patients with acute pulmonary failure. New Engl J Med 292:284PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shah DM- ,Newell JC- ,Dutton RE et al (1977) Continuous positive airway pressure versus positive end expiratory pressure in respiratory distress syndrome. J Thorac Cardiovase Surg 74:557Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Downs JB- ,Douglas ME, Sanfelippo et al (1977) Ventilatory pattern- ,intrapleural pressure- ,and cardiac output. Anesth Analg Curr Res 56:88Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Venus B- ,Jacobs HK- ,Mathru M (1980) Hemodynamic responses to different modes of mechanical ventilation in dogs with normal and acid aspirated lungs. Crit Care Med 8:620PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zarins CK- ,Bayne CG- ,Rice CL et al (1977) Does spontaneous ventilation with IMV protect from PEEP-induced cardiac output depression? J Surg Res 22:299PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dueck R- ,Wagner PD- ,West JB (1977) Effects of positive end expiratory pressure on gas exchange in dogs with normal and edematous lungs. Anesthesiology 47:359PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hammon JW- ,Wolfe WG- ,Moran JF et al (1976) The effect of positive end expiratory pressure on regional ventilation and perfusion in the normal and injured primate lung. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 72: 680PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Weisman IM- ,Rinaldo JE- ,Rogers RM et al (1983) State of the Art: Intermittent mandatory ventilation. Am Rev Respir Dis 127:641–647PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hudson LD (1981) Ventilatory management of patients with ARDS. Semin Respir Med 2:128–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Petty TL- ,Fowler AA (1983) III: Another look at ARDS. Intensive & Critical Care Digest 2:10–14Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. A. Shapiro

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations