Adaptive Lung Ventilation (ALV) during Anesthesia for Pulmonary Surgery: Automatic Response to Transitions to and from One-Lung Ventilation

Adaptive lung ventilation is a novel closed-loop-controlled ventilation system. Based upon instantaneous breath-to-breath analyses, the ALV controller adjusts ventilation patterns automatically to momentary respiratory mechanics. Its goal is to provide a preset alveolar ventilation (V A) and, at the same time, minimize the work of breathing. Aims of our study were (1) to investigate changes in respiratory mechanics during transition to and from one-lung ventilation (OLV), (2) to describe the automated adaptation of the ventilatory pattern. Methods. With institutional approval and informed consent, 9 patients (33–72 y, 66–88 kg) underwent ALV during total intravenous anesthesia for pulmonary surgery. The ALV controller uses a pressure controlled ventilation mode. V A is preset by the anesthesiologist. Flow, pressure, and CO₂ are continuously measured at the DLT connector. The signals were read into a IBM compatible PC and processed using a linear one-compartment model of the lung to calculate breath-by-breath resistance (R), compliance (C), respiratory time constant (TC), serial dead space (VdS) and V A. Based upon the results, the controller optimizes respiratory rate (RR) and tidal volume (VT) such as to achieve the preset V A with the minimum work of breathing. In addition to V A, only PEEP and FIO₂ settings are at the anesthesiologist's discretion. All patients were ventilated using FIO₂ = 1,0 and PEEP = 3 cm H₂O. Parameters of respiratory mechanics, ventilation, and ABG were recorded during three 5-min periods: 10 min prior to OLV (I), 20 min after onset of OLV (II), and after chest closure (III). Data analyses used nonparametric comparisons of paired samples (Wilcoxon, Friedman) with Bonferroni's correction. Significance was assumed at p < 0.05. Values are given as medians (range). Results. 20 min after onset of OLV (II), resistance had approximately doubled compared with (I), compliance had decreased from 54 (36–81) to 50 (25–70) ml/cm H₂O. TC remained stable at 1.4 (0.8–2.4) vs. 1.2 (0.9–1.6) s. Institution of OLV was followed by a reproducible response of the ALV controller. The sudden changes in respiratory mechanics caused a transient reduction in VT by 42 (8–59) %, with RR unaffected. In order to reestablish the preset V A, the controller increased inspiratory pressure in a stepwise fashion from 18 (14–23) to 27 (19–39) cm H₂O, thereby increasing VT close to baseline (7.5 (6.6–9.0) ml/kg BW vs. 7.9 (5.4–11.7) ml/kg BW). The controller was, thus, effective in maintaining V A. The minimum PaO₂ during phase II was 101 mmHg. After chest closure, respiratory mechanics had returned to baseline. Conclusions. Respiratory mechanics during transition to and from OLV are characterized by marked changes in R and C into opposite directions, leaving TC unaffected. The ALV controller manages these transitions successfully, and maintaines V A reliably without intervention by the anesthesiologist. VT during OLV was found to be consistently lower than recommended in the literature.