Dataset Information

Feasibility and reliability of an automated controller of inspired oxygen concentration during mechanical ventilation.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Hypoxemia and high fractions of inspired oxygen (FiO2) are concerns in critically ill patients. An automated FiO2 controller based on continuous oxygen saturation (SpO2) measurement was tested. Two different SpO2-FiO2 feedback open loops, designed to react differently based on the level of hypoxemia, were compared. The results of the FiO2 controller were also compared with a historical control group.

Methods

The system measures SpO2, compares with a target range (92% to 96%), and proposes in real time FiO2 settings to maintain SpO2 within target. In 20 patients under mechanical ventilation, two different FiO2-SpO2 open loops were applied by a dedicated research nurse during 3 hours, each in random order. The times spent in and outside the target SpO2 values were measured. The results of the automatic controller were then compared with a retrospective control group of 30 ICU patients. SpO2-FiO2 values of the control group were collected over three different periods of 6 hours.

Results

Time in the target range was higher than 95% with the controller. When the 20 patients were separated according to the median PaO2/FiO2 (160(133-176) mm Hg versus 239(201-285)), the loop with the highest slope was slightly better (P = 0.047) for the more-hypoxemic patients. Hyperoxemia and hypoxemia durations were significantly shorter with the controller compared with usual care: SpO2 target range was reached 90% versus 24%, 27% and 32% (P < .001) with the controller, compared with three historical control-group periods.

Conclusion

A specific FiO2 controller is able to maintain SpO2 reliably within a predefined target range. Two different feedback loops can be used, depending on the initial PaO2/FiO2; with both, the automatic controller showed excellent performance when compared with usual care.

SUBMITTER: Saihi K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4031979 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Timely regulation of oxygen (Fio2) is essential to prevent hyperoxemia or episodic hypoxemia. Exposure to excessive Fio2 is often noted early after onset of mechanical ventilation. In this pilot study, we examined the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of a clinical trial to prioritize Fio2 titration with electronic alerts to respiratory therapists.Study designOpen-labeled, randomized control pilot trial.SettingMedical ICU.SubjectsAdults requiring mechanical ventilation.InterventionsProtocolized oxygen titration was initiated one hour after initiation of mechanical ventilation. When Spo2 exceeded 92% while on Fio2 ≥ 0.5, an electronic alert to respiratory therapists was triggered at 30-minute intervals. In the control arm, respiratory therapists titrated Fio2 by standard physician's orders.Measurements and main resultsThe primary end point was to determine if early Fio2 titration based on automated alerts was feasible in terms of reducing hyperoxemia. Secondary analyses included the number and frequency of alerts, mechanical ventilation duration, and ICU length of stay. Among 135 randomized patients, 72 were assigned to the intervention arm and 63 to the control arm. A total 877 alerts were sent. Exposure to hyperoxemia was significantly reduced in the intervention group by a median of 7.5 hours (13.7 [interquartile range (IQR), 2.9-31.1] vs 21.2 [IQR, 10.9-64.4]; p < 0.0004). Maximal Fio2 titration during the first quartile resulted in significant reduction in mechanical ventilation duration and ICU stay. Minor hypoxemic events (Spo2 < 88%) represented 12% of alerts, 9% were transient and responded to a single Fio2 increase, whereas 3% of alerts were associated with recurrent transient hypoxemia.ConclusionsOur pilot study indicates that early Fio2 titration driven by automated alerts is feasible in the ICU, as reflected by a statistically significant reduction of hyperoxemia exposure, limited consequential hypoxemia, and reduced ICU resource utilization. The encouraging results of this pilot study need to be validated in a larger ICU cohort.

Project description:Automated control of mechanical ventilation during general anaesthesia is not common. A novel system for automated control of most of the ventilator settings was designed and is available on an anaesthesia machine.The 'Automated control of mechanical ventilation during general anesthesia study' (AVAS) is an international investigator-initiated bicentric observational study designed to examine safety and efficacy of the system during general anaesthesia. The system controls mechanical breathing frequency, inspiratory pressure, pressure support, inspiratory time and trigger sensitivity with the aim to keep a patient stable in user adoptable target zones. Adult patients, who are classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I, II or III, scheduled for elective surgery of the upper or lower limb or for peripheral vascular surgery in general anaesthesia without any additional regional anaesthesia technique and who gave written consent for study participation are eligible for study inclusion. Primary endpoint of the study is the frequency of specifically defined adverse events. Secondary endpoints are frequency of normoventilation, hypoventilation and hyperventilation, the time period between switch from controlled ventilation to assisted ventilation, achievement of stable assisted ventilation of the patient, proportion of time within the target zone for tidal volume, end-tidal partial pressure of carbon dioxide as individually set up for each patient by the user, frequency of alarms, frequency distribution of tidal volume, inspiratory pressure, inspiration time, expiration time, end-tidal partial pressure of carbon dioxide and the number of re-intubations.AVAS will be the first clinical study investigating a novel automated system for the control of mechanical ventilation on an anaesthesia machine. The study was approved by the ethics committees of both participating study sites. In case that safety and efficacy are acceptable, a randomised controlled trial comparing the novel system with the usual practice may be warranted.DRKS DRKS00011025, registered 12 October 2016; clinicaltrials.gov ID. NCT02644005, registered 30 December 2015.