A study of 168 central venous pressure measurements obtained during mechanical ventilation (MV) and spontaneous breathing (SB) was undertaken to determine the existence and magnitude of systematic differences. The results show that MV readings were followed closely by predictable changes in SB readings, with a mean difference of 1.8 cm H20. Both MV and SB protocols were sensitive to hemodynamic changes when taken serially. We feel that, based on these results, the MV protocol will more accurately reflect the patient's cardiopulmonary status during mechanical ventilatory support.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
PowersSJr, DultonRD: Correlation of positive end expiratory pressure with cardiovascular performance. Crit Care Med3:64, 1975.
2.
HardyJD, GarciaJB, HardyJA: Fluid replacement monitoring. Ann Surg180:162, 1974.
3.
MarchiondoK: CVP—The whys and hows of central venous pressure monitoring. Nursing4:21, 1974.
4.
KayG, KearnsP: Monitoring central venous pressure, principles, procedures, and problems. Canad Nurse72:15, 1976.
5.
DavidsonR, ParkerM, HarrisonRA: The validity of determinations of pulmonary wedge pressures during mechanical ventilation. Chest73:352, 1978.
6.
DownsJB, KleinEF, DesautelsDA, ModellJH, KirbyRR: Intermittent mandatory ventilation, a new approach to weaning patients from mechanical ventilation. Chest63:331, 1973.
