Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Management of Patient-Ventilator Asynchrony
Management of Patient-Ventilator Asynchrony
, Editor
This article has been selected for the Anesthesiology CME Program. Learning objectives and disclosure and ordering information can be found in the CME section at the front of
this issue. This article is featured in “This Month in Anesthesiology,” page 1A.
Submitted for publication August 28, 2020. Accepted for publication January 8, 2021. Published online first on February 16, 2021. From the Critical Care Section, Northeast Georgia
Physicians Group, Northeast Georgia Health System, Gainesville, Georgia.
Copyright © 2021, the American Society of Anesthesiologists, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Anesthesiology 2021; 134:629–36. DOI: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000003704
impact the smooth coordination of patient effort and ventila- patient to be supported, similar to how the anesthesiolo-
tor delivery.The modern ICU ventilator is a complex device gist assists efforts by squeezing the reservoir bag when the
whose operations are controlled by sophisticated micropro- patient makes an inspiratory effort. In this mode, if the
cessors.22–24 There are multiple ventilators in the marketplace, patient makes an inspiratory effort that is detected by the
each with their own proprietary features. It would be impos- machine, the breath is augmented with a preselected level
sible to discuss all the various modes of ventilation that are of pressure above positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP)
available in the critical care environment, but very relevant to with a high initial inspiratory flow followed by a decelerat-
the practice of anesthesia is the fact that modern anesthesia ing flow pattern to maintain the pressure (fig. 1). This sup-
machine ventilators have incorporated many of the advances port is terminated when the inspiratory flow decreases to a
developed for ICU ventilators. Perhaps the most significant level predetermined by the manufacturer.22–24There are sev-
of these is the incorporation of a mechanism to sense and eral other innovations in mechanical ventilation that have
pathophysiology that leads to a particular asynchrony is spe- to trigger, flow, or cycling problems. Within the category
cific not only to the patient but also to the mode of ventila- of inspiratory trigger asynchronies there are three types.
tion and the settings of that mode of ventilation.
The question of why patients “fight the ventilator” can
only be considered within the context of patient character- Inspiratory Trigger Asynchronies
istics, the mode of ventilation, and the type of asynchrony. Ineffective Trigger. In this asynchrony, the patient makes
However, it will facilitate our initial attempt to understand inspiratory effort, but the ventilator does not respond with
what causes asynchrony by focusing on the various types. a mechanical breath (illustrated schematically in fig. 2A).
We will touch more on the limited options for altering Either the patient makes too weak an effort for the flow or
patient characteristics and the more extensive options for pressure sensor/trigger or the sensor is not set at an adequate
modifying the ventilator later when we consider how we threshold. There are multiple patient factors that can result
can correct asynchrony. in ineffective triggers, such as excessive sedation and weak-
In more severe cases, asynchrony might lead to sufficient ness/debility. There are factors that reflect both patient and
patient discomfort to be manifested as agitation, retrac- machine characteristics such as auto-PEEP, when the expi-
tions, coughing, very forceful exhalations, paradoxical ratory time is shorter than the time needed to fully deflate
thoracic–abdominal respiratory effort, or use of accessory the lungs, leading to hyperinflation (auto-PEEP is recog-
muscles. When asynchrony is not as severe, recognition is nized by observing the presence of expiratory flow at the
generally only possible by analysis of pressure–time and end of expiration on the flow vs. time graph on the ventila-
flow–time waveforms.26 This also is necessary for clas- tor screen.). There are also factors that reflect ventilator set-
sifying the asynchrony, which is an important exercise tings, such as excessive pressure support or overventilation.
because it may provide clues regarding how to correct When ineffective triggers are detected, the provider
the asynchrony. Patient–ventilator asynchrony can be due should optimize the level of sedation. If possible, one
A B
Fig. 2. (A) Schematic illustration of ineffective effort. Note the small upper deflection in the flow waveform (indicated by the caret) and the
small downward deflection in the pressure waveform (indicated by the inverted caret). These are signs of patient effort, which is not followed
by a full breath. (B) Schematic illustration of double triggering. Note second breath immediately after the return to expiratory flow from the
first breath to zero. (C) Schematic illustration of premature termination. Note the small upward deflection in the expiratory phase of the flow
waveform (indicated by the caret) reflecting inspiratory effort by the patient attempt. (D) Schematic illustration of delayed termination. Note
the negative flow in the flow waveform while the inspiratory pressure is still maintained (indicated by the caret), reflecting the patient attempt
to expire. This precedes full expiratory flow when inspiratory pressure is released.
can adjust the sensitivity of the trigger for initiation of a by secretions, or endotracheal tube cuff leaks interpreted by
mechanical breath. Excessive ventilation (with hypocarbia) the ventilator as a negative pressure signaling an inspiratory
should be avoided, and auto-PEEP should be minimized by effort.
administering bronchodilators and avoiding hyperinflation, When autotriggering is detected, one should ensure that
because if auto-PEEP is high, the negative pressure that the the airway is cleared of secretions and also that there are no
patient will need to generate to trigger a machine breath leaks. If possible, the sensitivity of the flow or the pressure
will also be high. sensor should be adjusted.
Autotrigger. Autotrigger refers to the delivery of a mechan- Double Triggering. Double triggering is recognized by two
ical breath in the absence of patient effort. This asynchrony mechanical breaths “stacked,” one after the other, without
can result from cardiac oscillations (if the flow or pressure expiration between them or an expiratory time less than
sensor is at too sensitive a level), oscillations in flow caused half of the mean inspiratory time (illustrated schematically
in fig. 2B). This is a particularly concerning asynchrony If delayed termination is detected, one should shorten the
because the delivery of two mechanical breaths without full inspiratory time.
expiration between can lead to increased intrathoracic pres-
sure with resultant impaired venous return and hypotension Correcting Patient–Ventilator Asynchrony
and patient discomfort. In some cases, double triggering If we view asynchrony as a mismatch between what the
is an extension of other asynchronies, specifically prema- patient wants and what the ventilator is delivering, then
ture termination (the ventilator ends the breath before the correction of asynchrony could theoretically be achieved by
patient’s efforts transition to expiration) or reverse trigger- either altering patient characteristics or the mode/settings
ing (the phenomena in which a mechanical breath triggers of the ventilator. The most common approach in anesthesia
a patient effort). Double triggering in general reflects inad- practice is the former, specifically increasing the depth of
equate machine support, such as flow starvation or a low sedation or anesthesia. In many cases, practitioners resort
that asynchrony is a mismatch between the patient and Pressure support ventilation may be ideal for this situation,
the machine, if we have limited options for changing the but we note that there are subtleties to the management
patient, then we need to focus on the ventilator. However, of patient–ventilator asynchrony when ventilation is non-
before any effort is made to optimize the ventilator mode invasive. One major difference between invasive and non-
and settings, one should first correct any external distur- invasive ventilation is the occurrence of leaks, and there is
bances because these can corrupt waveforms. Specifically, a significant correlation between the magnitude of leaks
leaks should be corrected to the extent possible, and the and the incidence of ineffective triggering and delayed ter-
airway should be cleared of secretions or any obstruc- mination.33,34 Also, the magnitude of leaks was correlated
tion to the extent possible. Once external perturbations with the level of pressure support, and it has been observed
are corrected, one can consider the ventilator mode and that the incidence of ineffective triggers can be reduced
settings. by decreasing pressure.35 It has also been demonstrated that
20. Tate JA, Devito Dabbs A, Hoffman LA, Milbrandt E, 30. Karalapillai D, Weinberg L, Peyton P, Ellard L, Hu R,
Happ MB: Anxiety and agitation in mechanically ven- Pearce B, Tan CO, Story D, O’Donnell M, Hamilton
tilated patients. Qual Health Res 2012; 22:157–73 P, Oughton C, Galtieri J, Wilson A, Serpa Neto A,
21. Kondili E, Prinianakis G, Georgopoulos D: Patient– Eastwood G, Bellomo R, Jones DA: Effect of intraop-
ventilator interaction. Br J Anaesth 2003; 91:106–19 erative low tidal volume vs. conventional tidal volume
22. Tobin MJ: Principles and Practice of Mechanical on postoperative pulmonary complications in patients
Ventilation, 3rd edition. New York, McGraw-Hill, undergoing major surgery: A randomized clinical trial.
2012 JAMA 2020; 324:848–58
23. Kacmarek RM: The mechanical ventilator: Past, pres- 31. Chanques G, Kress JP, Pohlman A, Patel S, Poston J,
ent, and future. Respir Care 2011; 56:1170–80 Jaber S, Hall JB: Impact of ventilator adjustment and
24. Branson RD: Patient–ventilator interaction:The last 40 sedation-analgesia practices on severe asynchrony in