Comparison Between Conventional Protective Mechanical Ventilation and High-frequency Oscillatory Ventilation Associated with the Prone Position

Objective: To compare the effects of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation and conventional protective mechanical ventilation associated with the prone position on oxygenation, histology and pulmonary oxidative damage in an experimental model of acute lung injury.

Methods: Forty-five rabbits with tracheostomy and vascular access were underwent mechanical ventilation. Acute lung injury was induced by tracheal infusion of warm saline. Three experimental groups were formed: healthy animals + conventional protective mechanical ventilation, supine position (Control Group; n = 15); animals with acute lung injury + conventional protective mechanical ventilation, prone position (CMVG; n = 15); and animals with acute lung injury + high-frequency oscillatory ventilation, prone position (HFOG; n = 15). Ten minutes after the beginning of the specific ventilation of each group, arterial gasometry was collected, with this timepoint being called time zero, after which the animal was placed in prone position and remained in this position for 4 hours. Oxidative stress was evaluated by the total antioxidant performance assay. Pulmonary tissue injury was determined by histopathological score. The level of significance was 5%.

Results: Both groups with acute lung injury showed worsening of oxygenation after induction of injury compared with the Control Group. After 4 hours, there was a significant improvement in oxygenation in the HFOG group compared with CMVG. Analysis of total antioxidant performance in plasma showed greater protection in HFOG. HFOG had a lower histopathological lesion score in lung tissue than CMVG.

Conclusion: High-frequency oscillatory ventilation, associated with prone position, improves oxygenation and attenuates oxidative damage and histopathological lung injury compared with conventional protective mechanical ventilation.