0
Original Research: ULTRASONOGRAPHY |

Ultrasonographic Diagnostic Criterion for Severe Diaphragmatic Dysfunction After Cardiac Surgery FREE TO VIEW

Nicolas Lerolle, MD; Emmanuel Guérot, MD; Saoussen Dimassi, MD; Rachid Zegdi, MD, PhD; Christophe Faisy, MD, PhD; Jean-Yves Fagon, MD, PhD; Jean-Luc Diehl, MD
Author and Funding Information

*From Service de Réanimation Médicale (Drs. Lerolle, Guérot, Dimassi, Faisy, Fagon, and Diehl), and Département de Chirurgie Cardiovasculaire (Dr. Zegdi), Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Assistance Publique–Hôpitaux de Paris, Université Paris Descartes, Faculté de Médecine, Paris, France.

Correspondence to: Nicolas Lerolle, MD, Service de Réanimation Médicale, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, 20, rue Leblanc, 75908 Paris Cedex 15, France; e-mail: nicolas.lerolle@egp.aphp.fr


The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Reproduction of this article is prohibited without written permission from the American College of Chest Physicians (www.chestjournal.org/misc/reprints.shtml).


Chest. 2009;135(2):401-407. doi:10.1378/chest.08-1531
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Background:  Severe diaphragmatic dysfunction can prolong mechanical ventilation after cardiac surgery. An ultrasonographic criterion for diagnosing severe diaphragmatic dysfunction defined by a reference technique such as transdiaphragmatic pressure measurements has never been determined.

Methods:  Twenty-eight patients requiring mechanical ventilation > 7 days postoperatively were studied. Esophageal and gastric pressures were measured to calculate transdiaphragmatic pressure during maximal inspiratory effort and the Gilbert index, which evaluates the diaphragm contribution to respiratory pressure swings during quiet ventilation. Ultrasonography allowed measuring right and left hemidiaphragmatic excursions during maximal inspiratory effort. Best E is the greatest positive value from either hemidiaphragm. Twenty cardiac surgery patients with uncomplicated postoperative course were also evaluated with ultrasonography preoperatively and postoperatively. Measurements were performed in semirecumbent position.

Results:  Transdiaphragmatic pressure during maximal inspiratory effort was below normal value in 27 of the 28 patients receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation (median, 39 cm H2O; interquartile range [IQR] 28 cm H2O). Eight patients had Gilbert indexes ≤ 0 indicating severe diaphragmatic dysfunction. Best E was lower in patients with Gilbert index ≤ 0 than > 0 (30 mm; IQR, 10 mm; vs 19 mm; IQR, 7 mm, respectively; p = 0.001). Best E < 25 mm had a positive likelihood ratio of 6.7 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.4 to 19) and a negative likelihood ratio of 0 (95% CI, 0 to 1.1) for having a Gilbert index ≤ 0. None of the patients with uncomplicated course had Best E < 25 mm either preoperatively or postoperatively.

Conclusions:  Ultrasonographic-based determination of hemidiaphragm excursions in patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation after cardiac surgery may help identify those with and without severe diaphragmatic dysfunction as defined by the Gilbert index.

Figures in this Article

Postoperative cardiac patients are generally able to resume spontaneous breathing as soon as they recover from anesthesia. However, 3 to 6% of these patients require prolonged mechanical ventilation.1,2 Some degree of diaphragmatic dysfunction related to phrenic nerve injury frequently occurs following cardiac surgery. Prevalence of electromyographic abnormalities as high as 26% has been reported, but fortunately diaphragmatic dysfunction remains modest in most patients and does not translate into significant clinical impairment.36 On the opposite, the more severe forms of diaphragmatic dysfunction can be responsible for delayed weaning leading to prolonged stay in the ICU.7

Severe diaphragmatic dysfunction generally comes into question in cardiac postoperative patients requiring prolonged ventilation after cure or exclusion of usual causes of weaning failure such as pneumonia or volume overload. Diagnosing such severe dysfunction is crucial because it has been shown to carry a high risk of subsequent complications such as pneumonia, sudden respiratory arrest, and prolonged mechanical ventilation.7 Transdiaphragmatic pressure measurements allow functional evaluation of the diaphragm and has proved to be relevant in such patients to diagnose severe diaphragmatic dysfunction.7 This technique, however, is semiinvasive and does not discriminate which side, or both, of the diaphragm is dysfunctional. Ultrasonography enables totally noninvasive visualization of the motion of each hemidiaphragm.8 However, the significance of the morphologic data obtained by ultrasonography is not known: no correlation has been made between ultrasonographic observations and functional data obtained by transdiaphragmatic measurements. The difficulty to extrapolate morphologic observation to functional evaluation is illustrated by the fact that 6% of asymptomatic subjects have a dyskinetic hemidiaphragm.8 This observation relates to the fact that one efficient hemidiaphragm is sufficient to generate adequate transdiaphragmatic pressure during quiet breathing.8,9 Therefore, evaluating the motion of the better hemidiaphragm by ultrasonography may be more relevant to functional evaluation than detecting an immobile or dyskinetic hemidiaphragm.

The aim of this study was to determine a quantitative ultrasonographic criterion of diaphragm motion for the diagnosis of severe diaphragmatic dysfunction as defined by transdiaphragmatic pressure measurements used as a reference method. Thus, we studied cardiac surgery patients with postoperative prolonged mechanical ventilation with both techniques. Additionally, the ultrasonographic criterion was assessed in cardiac surgery patients with uncomplicated postoperative course, both before and after surgery.

This study was conducted prospectively in the medical ICU of Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France, a tertiary university hospital. From December 2004 to March 2006, 28 consecutive patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation > 7 days postoperatively after cardiac surgery underwent diaphragmatic ultrasonography when they met the criteria for a first weaning trial: (1) Glasgow coma scale score ≥ 14; (2) hemodynamic stability without vasopressor use; (3) inspired fraction of oxygen < 50%, and positive end-expiratory pressure level ≤ 5 cm H2O; and (4) no suspected or ongoing sepsis or uncompensated cardiac failure.

As part of standard care in our ICU, such postcardiac surgery patients systematically undergo transdiaphragmatic pressure measurements,7 and ultrasonography is performed on the same day. Two independent operators measured transdiaphragmatic pressure (J-L.D) and performed ultrasonography (N.L), each blinded to the results of the other. All measurements were obtained after 10 min breathing on T-piece. Patients were allowed to rest on mechanical ventilation for 2 h between each measurement. The order of measurements was randomly determined. Date of measurements could not be standardized in reference with surgery because criteria fulfillment depended on individual patient course and was screened by the primary physician independently of this study. Because treating physicians were not aware of the ultrasonography results, they obviously did not influence care.

To further assess the predictive value of ultrasonography to diagnose or exclude severe diaphragmatic dysfunction, 20 consecutive cardiac surgery patients underwent diaphragmatic ultrasonography on the day before surgery, and on day 2 or day 3 postoperatively. All of these patients had uncomplicated immediate postoperative courses (successfully extubated in the 12 h following surgery) and were considered to represent “standard” cardiac surgery patients regarding mechanical ventilation weaning.

Every patient was informed of the study, and informed consent was obtained. The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the French Society for Intensive Care Medicine.

Ultrasonography

Doppler ultrasonography was performed with a 7.5-MHz transducer (Envisor; Philips Medical Systems; Bothell, WA). All measurements were obtained with subjects in semirecumbent position (head 45° from bed). Longitudinal images parallel to body axis were obtained on left and right midaxillary lines to visualize the longest course of the corresponding hemidiaphragm (Fig 1). The excursion of the leading edge of the diaphragmatic echo was recorded where the diaphragm had the largest excursion. In the majority of postoperative cardiac surgery patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation, some amount of bilateral pleural effusion and/or passive pulmonary atelectasis allowed easy visualization of the entire hemidiaphragm. In absence of pleural fluid or atelectasis, air-filled lung blocks ultrasound transmission, but satisfactory observation of the hemidiaphragms was possible through the liver or spleen. When the entire hemidiaphragm was not observed on the same ultrasonographic slice, we paid special attention to search several ultrasonographic windows for the greatest diaphragmatic excursion. Diaphragmatic excursion was measured from the end of normal expiration to end of maximal inspiratory effort (right hemidiaphragm excursion on maximal inspiratory effort [E-right]; left hemidiaphragm excursion on maximal inspiratory effort [E-left]; Fig 1). Seven measurements were obtained, and the three best were retained and averaged for each side. Each value for excursion of the leading edge of the diaphragmatic echo value was defined as being positive when physiologic hemidiaphragmatic descent was observed during inspiration and negative when paradoxical hemidiaphragmatic ascent was observed during inspiration. The greatest positive value from either hemidiaphragm on maximal inspiratory effort (Best E) was the greatest positive value from either E-right or E-left.

Figure Jump LinkFigure 1 Top left, A: The ultrasonography (US) probe was positioned on left or right midaxillary line to observe longitudinal images parallel to body axis. Top right, B: Schematic representation of the ultrasonographically observed structures. In the postoperative period, excellent ultrasonographic visualization of the entire length of the diaphragm is frequently permitted by presence of some amount of pleural effusion and/or atelectasis. Bottom left, C, and bottom right, D: Ultrasonography of a hemidiaphragmatic assessment (right sided). Diaphragmatic excursion was measured from the end of normal expiration (bottom left, C) to end of maximal inspiratory effort (bottom right, D). At end-expiratory time, a mark is placed on the leading edge of the diaphragmatic echo. At end-inspiratory time, a second mark is placed, corresponding to the displacement of the first mark during inspiration. Distance between the two marks gives the hemidiaphragmatic excursion.Grahic Jump Location

In a prestudy, reproducibility of ultrasonographic measurements was assessed on 19 ICU patients. Two intensivists, each blinded to the results of the other, performed ultrasonography during two different spontaneous breathing trial sessions on the same day. Intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility (intraclass correlation coefficients and 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) were 0.99 (95% CI, 0.97 to 0.99) for E-left and 0.88 (95% CI, 0.73 to 0.94) for E-right; and 0.99 (95% CI, 0.98 to 1.00) and 0.90 (95% CI, 0.79 to 0.95) for E-left; and 0.99 (95% CI, 0.98 to 1.00) and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.81 to 0.96), for Best E, respectively.10

Transdiaphragmatic Pressure Measurements in Patients With Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation

Transdiaphragmatic pressure measurements were performed as described elsewhere.79,11 In brief, esophageal and gastric pressures were measured with a double-balloon catheter (Marquat; Boissy Saint-Léger, France) connected to two differential pressure transducers (MP45; Validyne; Northridge, CA). All measurements were obtained with subjects in semirecumbent position (head 45° from bed). Signals were sampled and digitized at 128 Hz, and data were entered into a computer, allowing the calculation of the following: (1) transdiaphragmatic pressure during a maximal static inspiratory effort, against an airway occluded at end-expiration (25-s occlusion); three attempts were done, and the highest value was retained; (2) the ratio of transdiaphragmatic pressure change during normal inspiration to the difference between peak inspiratory gastric pressure and end-expiratory gastric pressure during normal inspiration, also known as the Gilbert index, which evaluates the contribution of the diaphragm to respiratory pressure swings during quiet tidal breathing,12 The Gilbert index is normally > 0.30, with a value ≤ 0 indicating a very severe diaphragmatic dysfunction.7,12

Clinical Data

In patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation; age; Simplified Acute Physiology Score-II at ICU admission13; type of cardiac surgery; time interval between surgery and measurements; outcome in ICU; total duration of mechanical ventilation; number of extubation failures (reintubation during the 48 h following extubation); number of ventilator-associated pneumonia episodes; need for tracheotomy; and duration of ICU stay were recorded. In cardiac surgery patients with an uncomplicated postoperative outcome, age, sex, and type of cardiac surgery were recorded.

Statistical Analysis

Data are presented as median (interquartile range [IQR]) or number. Statistical analysis was performed using statistical software (Statview 5.0; SAS Institute; Cary, NC; and Stata Software; StataCorp LP; College Station, TX). The Kruskal-Wallis test, Mann-Whitney U test, or Fisher exact test, as appropriate, were applied for between-group comparisons. The relationship between continuous variables was evaluated using Spearman correlation coefficient. We constructed receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves to evaluate the diagnostic value of Best E for predicting severe diaphragmatic dysfunction (defined by a Gilbert index ≤ 0). The area under the ROC curve and its 95% CI were estimated. We chose the cutoff point giving the highest accuracy for the diagnosis of severe diaphragmatic dysfunction; p < 0.05 was considered significant.

Patients With Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation

Twenty-eight patients receiving prolonged postoperative mechanical ventilation after cardiac surgery were studied. Median age was 70 years (IQR, 16 years), and 18 patients were male (mean Simplified Acute Physiology Score-II at hospital admission, 45 [IQR, 21]). Type of surgery was coronary artery bypass grafting in 11 patients, valve replacement in 9 patients, coronary artery bypass grafting plus valve replacement in 4 patients, and other procedures in 4 patients; 5 patients underwent reoperation. None had topical cardiac cooling with ice-cold solution in the pericardium. Normothermic cardioplegia had been applied in all patients. Prolonged ventilation after surgery was attributed to pneumonia or other infections and/or cardiac failure. A median of 11 days (IQR, 16 days) elapsed between surgery and the day of diaphragmatic evaluation. Diaphragmatic testing was performed at distance (minimum 5 days) of administration of any paralyzing agent or sedative. All patients were awake and able to move their legs and arms on demand with strength evaluated ≥ 4/5 on the day of diaphragmatic assessment, but no formal testing for ICU neuromyopathy was performed.

Transdiaphragmatic pressure measurements displayed an abnormal maximal static inspiratory effort for all but one patient (39 cm H2O; IQR, 28, cm H2O; normal > 80 cm H2O).8 The median Gilbert index was 0.16 (IQR, 0.44). This index was normal (> 0.30), excluding significant diaphragmatic dysfunction, for nine patients; low positive (< 0.30 but > 0), indicating moderate diaphragmatic dysfunction, for 11 patients; and very low (≤ 0), indicating severe diaphragmatic dysfunction, for 8 patients. Of note, patients with such severe diaphragmatic dysfunction had significantly worse outcomes than the other patients (Table 1), no difference for redo surgery was noted (n = 1 vs n = 4, respectively; p > 0.9).

Table Graphic Jump Location
Table 1 Outcome of Patients Receiving Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation*

*Data are presented as median (IQR) unless otherwise indicated.

†Independently of the date of diaphragmatic evaluation.

Ultrasonographic examinations of both hemidiaphragms were possible in all patients. Nine patients had paradoxical inspiratory motion (dyskinesia) or immobility of a hemidiaphragm (akinesia). Akinesia/dyskinesia was left sided in six patients and right sided in three patients. No patient had bilateral akinesia/dyskinesia. Akinesia/dyskinesia was encountered both in patients with Gilbert index ≤ 0 and > 0 (n = 5 and n = 4, respectively). Nineteen patients had physiologic inspiratory descent of both hemidiaphragm. Ultrasonographic parameters are presented in Table 2. Best E correlated significantly with Gilbert index (ρ = 0.64, p = 0.001; Fig 2). Indeed, Best E was significantly different in patients with Gilbert index ≤ 0 and > 0 (Table 2, Fig 3). ROC curve for Best E as a criterion for having a Gilbert index ≤ 0 had an area under curve of 0.93 (95% CI, 0.77 to 0.99). The cutoff point giving the highest accuracy for predicting Gilbert index ≤ 0 was Best E < 25 mm. This Best E value had a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI, 63 to 100%), a specificity of 85% (95% CI, 62 to 97%), a positive likelihood ratio of 6.7 (95% CI, 2.4 to 19), and a negative likelihood ratio of 0 (95% CI, 0 to 1.1) for having a Gilbert index ≤ 0.

Table Graphic Jump Location
Table 2 Ultrasonographic Observations in Cardiac Surgery Patients With Uncomplicated Postoperative Course Evaluated Before and After Cardiac Surgery and in Patients Receiving Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation*

*Data are presented as median (IQR) unless otherwise indicated. Kruskal-Wallis test showed significant difference between the four groups for E-left, E-right, and Best E (p < 0.001 for all parameters).

†p = 0.07 for comparisons before vs after-surgery variables in patients with uncomplicated course.

‡p < 0.0001 for comparisons before vs after-surgery variables in patients with uncomplicated course.

§p = 0.07 for comparisons of patients with Gilbert index > 0 and ≤ 0.

‖p = 0.001 for comparisons of patients with Gilbert index > 0 and ≤ 0.

¶p = 0.03 for comparisons of after-surgery variables in patients with uncomplicated course vs patients with Gilbert index > 0.

#p = 0.5 for comparisons of after-surgery variables in patients with uncomplicated course vs patients with Gilbert index > 0.

**p = 0.007 for comparisons of after-surgery variables in patients with uncomplicated course vs patients with Gilbert index > 0.

Figure Jump LinkFigure 2 Graphic representation of the relationship between Best E and Gilbert index in the 28 postoperative patients receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation.Grahic Jump Location
Figure Jump LinkFigure 3 Graphic representation showing Best E in patients with prolonged mechanical ventilation, n = 28, and postoperative Best E in patients with uncomplicated course, n = 20. Horizontal bars indicate median values.Grahic Jump Location
Patients With Uncomplicated Postoperative Course

Twenty cardiac surgery patients were evaluated preoperatively with ultrasonography. All of them were weaned from the ventilator in the 12 h following surgery and were then examined on days 2 or 3 after surgery. Median age was 64 years (IQR, 20 years), and 10 patients were male. Surgery was coronary artery bypass grafting alone in 10 patients, plus valve replacement or repair in 3 patients, valve replacement or repair alone in 5 patients, and other procedures in 2 patients. One patient had redo surgery, and cardioplegia was normothermic in all patients.

Best E < 25 mm was not encountered in any patient either before or after surgery (Fig 3). A significant decrease in all of the ultrasonographic excursion parameters was observed after cardiac surgery (Table 2). Three patients had akinesia/dyskinesia of a hemidiaphragm postoperatively. E-left and Best E were significantly higher than in patients requiring prolonged ventilation and with Gilbert index > 0.

In this study, we observed that ultrasonographically determined Best E < 25 mm was associated with severe diaphragmatic dysfunction as defined by a Gilbert index ≤ 0 measured during transdiaphragmatic pressure measurements. This ultrasonographic threshold had an excellent negative likelihood ratio, which was confirmed by studying patients with uncomplicated postoperative course, none of them having Best E < 25 mm, either before or after surgery.

The 28 patients with prolonged mechanical ventilation reflect not the usual course of patients after cardiac surgery, but a subgroup of patients with an expected high frequency of severe diaphragmatic dysfunction. Indeed, in eight of these patients, transdiaphragmatic pressure measurements diagnosed severe diaphragmatic dysfunction. It is important to underline that assessment of diaphragmatic function in patients with prolonged ventilation is not intended to predict success or failure of a first T-piece trial after cardiac surgery, but to find an explanation for prolonged mechanical ventilation after cardiac surgery and to invite attention to patients at high risk of further respiratory complications.7 Indeed, we observed a very good association between clinical outcome parameters and the results of our reference method, transdiaphragmatic pressure measurements. Although Gilbert index was not measured in the 20 patients with uncomplicated course after surgery, absence of any weaning difficulty indicates that absence of severe diaphragmatic dysfunction can be assumed.

Several studies have previously described the use of ultrasonographically observed hemidiaphragm motion to diagnose diaphragmatic dysfunction after cardiac surgery.4,1416 In these studies, ultrasonography was not compared to any evaluation of diaphragmatic function or with clinical outcome or, if compared to such parameters, no severe diaphragmatic dysfunction was observed, limiting any conclusion on the utility of ultrasonography in the critical care setting. Gottesman and McCool17 studied ultrasonographically visualized thickening of the diaphragm, which correlates with its contraction. Nevertheless, ultrasonographic assessment of diaphragm thickening requires perfect visualization of the different diaphragmatic layers throughout the respiratory cycle, which is almost impossible in ICU patients undergoing routine evaluation.

Considering the excellent negative likelihood ratio of Best E < 25 mm, ultrasonography may be considered to exclude severe diaphragmatic dysfunction following cardiac surgery in daily practice with the advantages of being fully noninvasive and widely available in ICU. The good agreement between observers confirms the relevance of ultrasonography for daily practice. On the other hand, the dependency of Best E on maximal voluntary inspiratory effort in these patients limits the interpretation of a Best E value < 25 mm even if the positive likelihood ratio of ultrasonography was substantial. In a two-step strategy, Gilbert index determination, being independent of the patient effort, could therefore be used in patients with Best E < 25 mm for confirming severe diaphragmatic dysfunction with certainty. Positive predictive value of ultrasonography would merit to be refined on a larger validation cohort. Unfortunately, conducting such study is impeded by the infrequency of severe diaphragmatic dysfunction after cardiac surgery. Our results are restricted to patients after cardiac surgery with supposed surgery-related phrenic nerve injury, and cannot be extrapolated to other form of diaphragmatic dysfunction although ICU neuromyopathy may also have participated in the pathogenesis of diaphragmatic failure in our patients. In conclusion, ultrasonography-based determination of hemidiaphragmatic excursion in patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation after cardiac surgery is a useful technique for ruling out severe diaphragmatic dysfunction.

Best E

greatest positive value from either hemidiaphragm on maximal inspiratory effort

CI

confidence interval

E-left

left hemidiaphragm excursion on maximal inspiratory effort

E-right

right hemidiaphragm excursion on maximal inspiratory effort

IQR

interquartile range

ROC

receiver operating characteristic

Engoren M, Buderer NF, Zacharias A. Long-term survival and health status after prolonged mechanical ventilation after cardiac surgery. Crit Care Med. 2000;28:2742-2749. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
 
LoCicero J III, McCann B, Massad M, et al. Prolonged ventilatory support after open-heart surgery. Crit Care Med. 1992;20:990-992. [PubMed]
 
Abd AG, Braun NM, Baskin MI, et al. Diaphragmatic dysfunction after open heart surgery: treatment with a rocking bed. Ann Intern Med. 1989;111:881-886. [PubMed]
 
DeVita MA, Robinson LR, Rehder J, et al. Incidence and natural history of phrenic neuropathy occurring during open heart surgery. Chest. 1993;103:850-856. [PubMed]
 
Markand ON, Moorthy SS, Mahomed Y, et al. Postoperative phrenic nerve palsy in patients with open-heart surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 1985;39:68-73. [PubMed]
 
Wilcox P, Baile EM, Hards J, et al. Phrenic nerve function and its relationship to atelectasis after coronary artery bypass surgery. Chest. 1988;93:693-698. [PubMed]
 
Diehl J-L, Lofaso F, Deleuze P, et al. Clinically relevant diaphragmatic dysfunction after cardiac operations. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1994;107:487-498. [PubMed]
 
Tobin M, Laghi F.Tobin M. Monitoring of respiratory muscle function. Principles and practice of intensive care monitoring. 1998; New York, NY MacGraw-Hill:497-544
 
Scillia P, Cappello M, De Troyer A. Determinants of diaphragm motion in unilateral diaphragmatic paralysis. J Appl Physiol. 2004;96:96-100. [PubMed]
 
Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlation: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull. 1979;86:420-428. [PubMed]
 
Baydur A, Behrakis PK, Zin WA, et al. A simple method for assessing the validity of the esophageal balloon technique. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1982;126:788-791. [PubMed]
 
Gilbert R, Auchincloss JH Jr, Peppi D. Relationship of rib cage and abdomen motion to diaphragm function during quiet breathing. Chest. 1981;80:607-612. [PubMed]
 
Le Gall J-R, Lemeshow S, Saulnier F. A new Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) based on a European/North American multicenter study. JAMA. 1993;270:2957-2963. [PubMed]
 
Fedullo AJ, Lerner RM, Gibson J, et al. Sonographic measurement of diaphragmatic motion after coronary artery bypass surgery. Chest. 1992;102:1683-1686. [PubMed]
 
Manabe T, Ohtsuka M, Usuda Y, et al. Ultrasonography and lung mechanics can diagnose diaphragmatic paralysis quickly. Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann. 2003;11:289-292. [PubMed]
 
Merino-Ramirez MA, Juan G, Ramon M, et al. Electrophysiologic evaluation of phrenic nerve and diaphragm function after coronary bypass surgery: prospective study of diabetes and other risk factors. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2006;132:530-536. [PubMed]
 
Gottesman E, McCool FD. Ultrasound evaluation of the paralyzed diaphragm. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1997;155:1570-1574. [PubMed]
 

Figures

Figure Jump LinkFigure 1 Top left, A: The ultrasonography (US) probe was positioned on left or right midaxillary line to observe longitudinal images parallel to body axis. Top right, B: Schematic representation of the ultrasonographically observed structures. In the postoperative period, excellent ultrasonographic visualization of the entire length of the diaphragm is frequently permitted by presence of some amount of pleural effusion and/or atelectasis. Bottom left, C, and bottom right, D: Ultrasonography of a hemidiaphragmatic assessment (right sided). Diaphragmatic excursion was measured from the end of normal expiration (bottom left, C) to end of maximal inspiratory effort (bottom right, D). At end-expiratory time, a mark is placed on the leading edge of the diaphragmatic echo. At end-inspiratory time, a second mark is placed, corresponding to the displacement of the first mark during inspiration. Distance between the two marks gives the hemidiaphragmatic excursion.Grahic Jump Location
Figure Jump LinkFigure 2 Graphic representation of the relationship between Best E and Gilbert index in the 28 postoperative patients receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation.Grahic Jump Location
Figure Jump LinkFigure 3 Graphic representation showing Best E in patients with prolonged mechanical ventilation, n = 28, and postoperative Best E in patients with uncomplicated course, n = 20. Horizontal bars indicate median values.Grahic Jump Location

Tables

Table Graphic Jump Location
Table 1 Outcome of Patients Receiving Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation*

*Data are presented as median (IQR) unless otherwise indicated.

†Independently of the date of diaphragmatic evaluation.

Table Graphic Jump Location
Table 2 Ultrasonographic Observations in Cardiac Surgery Patients With Uncomplicated Postoperative Course Evaluated Before and After Cardiac Surgery and in Patients Receiving Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation*

*Data are presented as median (IQR) unless otherwise indicated. Kruskal-Wallis test showed significant difference between the four groups for E-left, E-right, and Best E (p < 0.001 for all parameters).

†p = 0.07 for comparisons before vs after-surgery variables in patients with uncomplicated course.

‡p < 0.0001 for comparisons before vs after-surgery variables in patients with uncomplicated course.

§p = 0.07 for comparisons of patients with Gilbert index > 0 and ≤ 0.

‖p = 0.001 for comparisons of patients with Gilbert index > 0 and ≤ 0.

¶p = 0.03 for comparisons of after-surgery variables in patients with uncomplicated course vs patients with Gilbert index > 0.

#p = 0.5 for comparisons of after-surgery variables in patients with uncomplicated course vs patients with Gilbert index > 0.

**p = 0.007 for comparisons of after-surgery variables in patients with uncomplicated course vs patients with Gilbert index > 0.

References

Engoren M, Buderer NF, Zacharias A. Long-term survival and health status after prolonged mechanical ventilation after cardiac surgery. Crit Care Med. 2000;28:2742-2749. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
 
LoCicero J III, McCann B, Massad M, et al. Prolonged ventilatory support after open-heart surgery. Crit Care Med. 1992;20:990-992. [PubMed]
 
Abd AG, Braun NM, Baskin MI, et al. Diaphragmatic dysfunction after open heart surgery: treatment with a rocking bed. Ann Intern Med. 1989;111:881-886. [PubMed]
 
DeVita MA, Robinson LR, Rehder J, et al. Incidence and natural history of phrenic neuropathy occurring during open heart surgery. Chest. 1993;103:850-856. [PubMed]
 
Markand ON, Moorthy SS, Mahomed Y, et al. Postoperative phrenic nerve palsy in patients with open-heart surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 1985;39:68-73. [PubMed]
 
Wilcox P, Baile EM, Hards J, et al. Phrenic nerve function and its relationship to atelectasis after coronary artery bypass surgery. Chest. 1988;93:693-698. [PubMed]
 
Diehl J-L, Lofaso F, Deleuze P, et al. Clinically relevant diaphragmatic dysfunction after cardiac operations. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1994;107:487-498. [PubMed]
 
Tobin M, Laghi F.Tobin M. Monitoring of respiratory muscle function. Principles and practice of intensive care monitoring. 1998; New York, NY MacGraw-Hill:497-544
 
Scillia P, Cappello M, De Troyer A. Determinants of diaphragm motion in unilateral diaphragmatic paralysis. J Appl Physiol. 2004;96:96-100. [PubMed]
 
Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlation: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull. 1979;86:420-428. [PubMed]
 
Baydur A, Behrakis PK, Zin WA, et al. A simple method for assessing the validity of the esophageal balloon technique. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1982;126:788-791. [PubMed]
 
Gilbert R, Auchincloss JH Jr, Peppi D. Relationship of rib cage and abdomen motion to diaphragm function during quiet breathing. Chest. 1981;80:607-612. [PubMed]
 
Le Gall J-R, Lemeshow S, Saulnier F. A new Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) based on a European/North American multicenter study. JAMA. 1993;270:2957-2963. [PubMed]
 
Fedullo AJ, Lerner RM, Gibson J, et al. Sonographic measurement of diaphragmatic motion after coronary artery bypass surgery. Chest. 1992;102:1683-1686. [PubMed]
 
Manabe T, Ohtsuka M, Usuda Y, et al. Ultrasonography and lung mechanics can diagnose diaphragmatic paralysis quickly. Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann. 2003;11:289-292. [PubMed]
 
Merino-Ramirez MA, Juan G, Ramon M, et al. Electrophysiologic evaluation of phrenic nerve and diaphragm function after coronary bypass surgery: prospective study of diabetes and other risk factors. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2006;132:530-536. [PubMed]
 
Gottesman E, McCool FD. Ultrasound evaluation of the paralyzed diaphragm. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1997;155:1570-1574. [PubMed]
 
NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

CHEST Journal Articles
CHEST Collections
PubMed Articles
  • CHEST Journal
    Print ISSN: 0012-3692
    Online ISSN: 1931-3543