The tension-based indices of oxygenation are:
- A-a gradient
- Magnitude of the PO2 gradient between the alveolus and the arterial blood, expressed in mmHg
- Calculated using the alveolar gas equation and PaO2 measurment
- Normal value is 7mmHg in the young, and 14 mmHg in the old.
- a/A ratio
- A ratio of arterial to alveolar PaO2
- A pO2(a/A) of over 75% is probably normal.
- Unlike the other indices, it is unaffected by FiO2 or barometric pressure.
- A normal a/A ratio in a hypoxic patient must be due to alveolar hypoventilation or low atmospheric pressure.
- A low a/A ratio may be due to any of the following:
- V/Q mismatch, eg shunt - intrapulmonary or intracardiac
- Diffusion defect
- Increased oxygen extraction ratio
- PaO2/FiO2 ratio
- Ratio of arterial oxygen to inspired oxygen
- Simple to calculate
- Acts as a risk stratification tool
- Insensitive to changes in atmospheric pressure
- Unable to discriminate between different aetiologies of hypoxia
- Respiratory index (RI) (RI = pO2(A-a)/pO2(a))
- This is the A-a gradient divided by the PaO2
- Similar in its use to the a/A ratio
- A normal RI is anything under 0.4,
This is not a simple topic; in fact it took a group of specialists a large hard-cover publication to make it complicated, prompting the editor of the BMJ to remark that "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple ... and wrong". The best reference discussing these indices seems to be Essentials of Oxygenation: Implication for Clinical Practice by Ahrens et al, particularly their Chapter 3 (Intrapulmonary Shunting). Another good comparison of these various indices is available for the paying customer of Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica.
Broadly, one can say that two things are true:
Indices based on oxygen tension are popular because of simplicity, not validity.
The best index of pulmonary oxygen transfer is the measured intrapulmonary shunt fraction.
The more familiar indices of oxygenation are:
These are tension-based indices; in that they require partial pressures of gases to be calculated from the alveolar gas equation, and are therefore subject to numerous influences as well as errors in the estimation of the respiratory quotient (RQ) which is a pain in the arse to measure directly.
The tension-based indices differ from the concentration-based index like FShunt. It is discussed in greater detail elsewhere; suffice to say, it relies on arterial oxygen content rather than partial pressure, and requires an assumption to be made regarding the arterio-venous oxygen content difference being 30-50ml/L, which is not a robust assumption in the hideously diseased ICU patient.
One might imagine that in a perfect world all the alveolar gas would gladly exchange into the blood, and there would be no difference in oxygen between them. Unfortunately, even with a completely normal alveolar gas exchange, there is a certain difference - inevitably, arterial pO2 is going to be lower.
Why, might one ask?
Numerous factors are in play. This was explored in depth by Kresten Mellemgaard in 1966. 80 normal subjects were investigated. Mellemgaard found that the A-a difference could be attributed to the following contributors:
Hills further elaborated on this in 1971. It looks like a very nice, heavily detailed article, but it is not available to me. Fortunately, Nunn's respiratory physiology textbook has a nice chapter on this topic (Ch. 11 of the 8th edition, "Oxygen" ). It's so nice that some of the diagrams were borrowed by the editors of Oh's Manual (in other words, if a book has influenced CICM examiners, it is probably worth reading before the exam).
In short, and at risk of wrecking SEO through repetition, the factors which influence oxygen tension-based indices are:
So, the A-a difference is increased, and you have all these potential reasons as to why. It is no wonder that indices based on it are criticised for being non-specific.
This is generally held to be the easiest oxygenation index to calculate; in fact Oh's Manual admits that "its main advantage is simplicity". One only needs two variables, and one divides one by the other; anything over 500 is normal. However, in this simplicity lurks a danger.
Because it uses raw partial pressure numbers, this index is susceptible to barometric horseplay.
Consider a young man involved in some sort of freakish helium balloon accident, trying to breathe a normal 21% oxygenated gas mixture at 4000m altitude. His atmospheric pressure is 475mmHg and the ideal alveolar O2 is something like 65mmHg. Let us say he is able to generate an arterial O2 of 58mmHg.
The PaO2/FiO2 ratio would be 65 ÷ 0.21, or 276- which would label this young man as fairly hypoxic. That might be accurate, but his lungs are working just fine. The A-a gradient would reveal that there is in fact only 7mmHg of difference between the alveoli and the arteries.
Conversely, the same young man, with the same findings, but at the bottom of a 10 kilometer mine shaft would find himself exposed to an atmospheric pressure of 1990mmHg. With exactly the same blood gas data, we would have exactly the same PaO2/FiO2 ratio (65 ÷ 0.21 = 276) . However, the alveolar O2 would now be 383mmHg, giving us an A-a gradient of 325mmHg. In this situation, the PaO2/FiO2 ratio would be underestimating the severity of the gas exchange failure.
PaO2/FiO2 ratio does nothing but describe the relationship between inspired gas fraction and arterial gas tension. This is unhelpful in determining as to why this difference arose. At least the A-a gradient, though a totally blunt tool, can discriminate between alveolar hypoventilation and V/Q mismatch.
Forgetting for a moment any discussion of actual utility, one should acknowledge that this index is in fact being used as a risk stratification tool. According to an extinct definition, "Acute Lung Injury" (ALI) is a PaO2/FiO2 ratio under 300, and in ARDS the ratio is under 200. The new "Berlin Definition" has not changed this very much. Rather, "ALI" as the descriptor of mildly damaged lungs has been abandoned, and instead the 300-200 ratio range is now "mild" ARDS, 200-100 is "moderate" and under 100 is "Severe". The associated mortality increase is quoted as 27%, 32% and 45% respectively.
The A-a gradient is essentially arterial (PaO2) subtracted from alveolar (PAO2). The resulting number is the magnitude of the gradient between the alveolus and the arterial blood, expressed in mmHg.
The normal value at 21% FiO2 is 7mmHg in the young, and 14mmHg in the old (Kanber et al, 1968). There are several age-based formulae which can be used to determine what the expected A-a gradient is, at any given age:
Normal A-a gradient = Age / 4 + 4 (in mmHg)
From LITFL and Part One, or
Normal A-a gradient = (Age +10) / 4 (in mmHg)
Normal A-a gradient = 2.5 + (0.21 * Age)
This index is highly dependent on FiO2 and shunt. Lets say you have one lung blocked up with pus, and the other lung pristine, generating a 50% shunt. With an unchanging shunt, you can go from a A-a gradient of 50 (PaO2 50mmHg, PAO2 100mmHg) to an A-a gradient of over 300 (PaO2 50mmHg, PAO2 377mmHg), all by changing the FiO2 from 21% to 60%.
Thus, one can only really rely on it in a patient breathing room air. It may be useful as a screening tool - one relaxes somewhat when the A-a gradient is normal on room air. One study of patients undergoing V/Q scans had revealed that only 1.8% of patients with a normal A-a gradient had a PE, and suggested that "further diagnostic evaluation may be unnecessary in this subgroup of patients". However, another similar study using angiography determined that "various combinations of the a-a gradient and blood gas levels failed to exclude PE in more than 35% of patients with no prior cardiovascular disease and in 25% of patients with prior cardiovascular disease". Thus, it may lull one into a false sense of security.
Of course, all this is in reference to ED patients. One may only interested in discriminating between those pleuritic chest pains who go home on clexane from those who go home with a lollypop.
An ICU population is somewhat different. What does an A-a gradient mean in the population of hypoxic critically ill patients? LITFL has a good page on the subject, which classifies hypoxia according to A-a gradient abnormalities:
Normal A-a gradient
Raised A-a gradient
Realistically speaking, the A-a gradient is only able to confidently identify one specific cause of hypoxia, which is alveolar hypoventilation. This is the case because the Alveolar Gas Equation factors in the measured arterial CO2 level.
The a/A ratio is is the PaO2 divided by the PAO2, and the ratio is offered as a percentage (i.e. there are [this many percent] of alveolar oxygen getting into the arterial circulation). The normal value is generally held to be anything greater than 75%.
It is said that the advantage of this over the standard A-a gradient is that it takes into account the changes in FiO2 which is a major confounder of the A-a gradient.
Observe a hypothetical table of findings:
|Arrival to ICU
In this patient, the A-a gradient changed impressively - but the a/A ratio did not. This also demonstrates the reliance of A-a gradient on the FiO2. In fact, observe the wild fluctuation in oxygenation indices: the P/F ratio is telling you the patient is improving, the A-a gradient is telling you they are getting worse, and the a/A ratio is convinced that the patient is exactly the same. At this point, a weaker person would become very disappointed by the tension-based oxygen indices.
In spite of this, the a/A ratio seems useful. Its utility in deciding on the supplemental oxygen level has been validated in at least one case series.
However, it may not add very much to the calculation of the A-a gradient. Observe this series of room air gases of identically hypoxic patients:
The a/A ratio and A-a gradient were both normal in the high altitude gas and in the hypercapneic patient.
Thus, both indices - when normal - can exclude V/Q mismatch, increased oxygen extraction ratio and diffusion defects as causes of hypoxia. The P/F ratio, blind to barometric pressure changes and pCO2 differences, does not notice any difference between these patients.
The "respiratory index" is simply the A-a gradient divided by the PaO2. Thus, a normal RI is anything under 0.4, corresponding to an A-a gradient of around 40mmHg at 21% FiO2 and a PaCO2 around 40mmHg. This is the most "permissive" of the indices; according to the abovelisted numbers its range of normality ends at an arterial O2 tension of around 60mmHg (where many of us would be uncomfortably breathless).
This index, like the a/A ratio, benefits from the use of the alveolar gas equation; its ability to compensate for changes in FiO2 and PaCO2 lend it a resilence which the A-a gradient lacks. As can be seen in the hypothetical list of ABG results above, the RI and the a/A ratio both reflect the reality of an unchanging intrapulmonary shunt, while the other indices offer ridiculous and contradictory suggestions.
Neither literature searches nor personal reflection has thus far revealed any advantages of the RI over a/A ratio to this author. There may be none, and the two may be equivalent. In general the RI appears to be a neglected index, and even Ahrens' extensively detailed "Essentials of Oxygenation" refuses to discuss it at any length because it is "a less commonly used measure".
The CICM Fellowship examiners have interrogated this cognitive niche in a past paper - Question 17 from the second paper of 2007 asks, "Outline the advantages and limitations of the A-a gradient and PaO2/FiO2 ratio as indices of pulmonary oxygen transfer". This may have something to do with Chapter 18 from Oh's Manual ("Monitoring oxygenation) by Thomas J Morgan and Balasubramanian Venkatesh, where precisely that issue is addressed on pages 148-149.
The college answer is a table, which - if retrofitted with extra indices - might resemble the following:
Arterial pO2 divided by alveolar pO2.
|Estimated shunt fraction (Fshunt)
(using a CaO2-CVO2 difference of around 30-50ml/L, or 2.3 mmol/L)
|Measured intrapulmonary shunt (Qs/Qt)