Dataset Information

Individualized mechanical ventilation in a shared ventilator setting: limits, safety and technical details.

ABSTRACT: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in an increased need for ventilators. The potential to ventilate more than one patient with a single ventilator, a so-called split ventilator setup, provides an emergency solution. Our hypothesis is that ventilation can be individualized by adding a flow restrictor to limit tidal volumes, add PEEP, titrate FiO2 and monitor ventilation. This way we could enhance optimization of patient safety and clinical applicability. We performed bench testing to test our hypothesis and identify limitations. We performed a bench testing in two test lungs: (1) determine lung compliance (2) determine volume, plateau pressure and PEEP, (3) illustrate individualization of airway pressures and tidal volume with a flow restrictor, (4a) illustrate that PEEP can be applied and individualized (4b) create and measure intrinsic PEEP (4c and d) determine PEEP as a function of flow restriction, (5) individualization of FiO2. The lung compliance varied between 13 and 27 mL/cmH2O. Set ventilator settings could be applied and measured. Extrinsic PEEP can be applied except for settings with a large expiratory time. Volume and pressure regulation is possible between 70 and 39% flow restrictor valve closure. Flow restriction in the tested circuit had no effect on the other circuit or on intrinsic PEEP. FiO2 could be modulated individually between 0.21 and 0.8 by gradually adjusting the additional flow, and minimal affecting FiO2 in the other circuit. Tidal volumes, PEEP and FiO2 can be individualized and monitored in a bench testing of a split ventilator. In vivo research is needed to further explore the clinical limitations and outcomes, making implementation possible as a last resort ventilation strategy. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s10877-020-00596-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

SUBMITTER: Stiers M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7537776 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction and aim:Studies regarding asynchrony in patients in the cardiac postoperative period are still only a few. The main objective of our study was to compare asynchronies incidence and its index (AI) in 3 different modes of ventilation (volume-controlled ventilation [VCV], pressure-controlled ventilation [PCV] and pressure-support ventilation [PSV]) after ICU admission for postoperative care. Methods:A prospective parallel randomised trialin the setting of a non-profitable hospital in Brazil. The participants were patients scheduled for cardiac surgery. Patients were randomly allocated to VCV or PCV modes of ventilation and later both groups were transitioned to PSV mode. Results:All data were recorded for 5 minutes in each of the three different phases: T1) in assisted breath, T2) initial spontaneous breath and T3) final spontaneous breath, a marking point prior to extubation. Asynchronies were detected and counted by visual inspection method by two independent investigators. Reliability, inter-rater agreement of asynchronies, asynchronies incidence, total and specific asynchrony indexes (AIt and AIspecific) and odds of AI ?10% weighted by total asynchrony were analysed. A total of 17 patients randomly allocated to the VCV (n=9) or PCV (n=8) group completed the study. High inter-rated agreement for AIt (ICC 0.978; IC95%, 0,963-0.987) and good reliability (r=0.945; p<0.001) were found. Eighty-two % of patients presented asynchronies, although only 7% of their total breathing cycles were asynchronous. Early cycling and double triggering had the highest rates of asynchrony with no difference between groups. The highest odds of AI ?10% were observed in VCV regardless the phase: OR 2.79 (1.36-5.73) in T1 vs T2, p=0.005; OR 2.61 (1.27-5.37) in T1 vs T3, p=0.009 and OR 4.99 (2.37-10.37) in T2 vs T3, p<0.001. Conclusions:There was a high incidence of breathing asynchrony in postoperative cardiac patients, especially when initially ventilated in VCV. VCV group had a higher chance of AI ?10% and this chance remained high in the following PSV phases.

Dataset Information

Individualized mechanical ventilation in a shared ventilator setting: limits, safety and technical details.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets