Skip to main content
eScholarship
Open Access Publications from the University of California

Contribution of lung and chest wall mechanics following emphysema resection

  • Author(s): Gelb, AF
  • McKenna, RJ
  • Brenner, M
  • Fischel, R
  • Baydur, A
  • Zamel, N
  • et al.
Abstract

Objective: To determine the contributions of (1) chest wall (Pcw) and (2) lung elastic recoil pressure (PL) to (3) total elastic recoil pressure exerted by the respiratory system (Prs) in 18 patients (12 men) aged 66±6 years (mean±1 SD) with severe emphysema who underwent video-assisted thoracoscopic bilateral lung volume reduction surgery under paralyzed (vecuronium) general anesthesia (isoflurane). Design: We measured preoperative and 6-week postoperative lung function studies, and intraoperative inspiratory lung conductance (GL), PL, Pcw, and Prs (cm H2O) at end-expiratory lung volume (EELV), EELV plus 0.60±0.0 L, and EELV plus 1.15±0.0 L. All values are mean±SEM. Results: Preoperative vs postoperative FVC was 1.9±0.1 L vs 2.3±0.1 L (p=0.03); FEV1 was 0.6±0.1 L vs 0.9±0.1 L (p<0.02); total lung capacity was 7.4±0.4 L vs 5.9±0.3 L (p<0.001); functional residual capacity was 5.7±0.4 L vs 4.4±0.2 L (p=0.001). At EELV preoperative vs postoperative, PL was 0.0±0.3 vs 1.1±0.05 (p=0.04), Pcw was 5.0±0.7 vs 2.4±0.9 (p=0.02), and Prs was 5.0±0.8 vs 3.5±0.7 (p=0.08). At EELV plus 0.60 L, PL was 3.2±0.6 vs 6.1±0.9 (p<0.001), Pcw was 8.8±0.8 vs 7.0±0.9 (p=0.12), and Prs was 12.0±0.8 vs 13.1±0.7 (p=0.80). At EELV plus 1.15 L, PL was 6.8±0.9 vs 10.3±1.1 (p<0.001), Pcw was 13.5±1.0 vs 11.2±1.2 (p=0.12), and Prs was 20±1.2 vs 21.5±1.0 p=0.93). At EELV plus 0.60 L, GL was 0.09±0.00 L/S/cm H2O vs 0.16±0.01 (p<0.01). At EELV plus 1.15 L, GL was 0.12±0.01 vs 0.21±0.03 (p<0.05) with similar preoperative vs postoperative GL/PL slopes. Conclusion: The increase in PL and decrease in Pcw following LVRS for emphysema may be responsible for the increase in spirometry and airway conductance.

Many UC-authored scholarly publications are freely available on this site because of the UC Academic Senate's Open Access Policy. Let us know how this access is important for you.

Main Content
Current View