Dataset Information

Nasopharyngeal tubes in pediatric anesthesia: Is the flow-dependent pressure drop across the tube suitable for calculating oropharyngeal pressure?

ABSTRACT:

Background

Nasopharyngeal tubes are useful in pediatric anesthesia for insufflating oxygen and anesthetics. During nasopharyngeal tube-anesthesia, gas insufflation provides some positive oropharyngeal pressure that differs from the proximal airway pressure owing to the flow-dependent pressure drop across the nasopharyngeal tube (ΔP_NPT ).

Aims

This study aimed to investigate whether ΔP_NPT could be used for calculating oropharyngeal pressure during nasopharyngeal tube-assisted anesthesia.

Methods

In a physical model of nasopharyngeal tube-anesthesia, using Rohrer's equation, we calculated ΔP_NPT for three nasopharyngeal tubes (3.5, 4.0, and 5.0 mm inner diameter) under oxygen and several sevoflurane in oxygen combinations in two ventilatory scenarios (continuous positive airway pressure and intermittent positive pressure ventilation). We then calculated oropharyngeal pressure as proximal airway pressure minus ΔP_NPT . Calculated and measured oropharyngeal pressure couples of values were compared with the root mean square deviation to assess accuracy. We also investigated whether oropharyngeal pressure accuracy depends on the nasopharyngeal tube diameter, flow rate, gas composition, and leak size. Using ΔP_NPT charts, we tested whether ΔP_NPT calculation was feasible in clinical practice.

Results

When we tested small-diameter nasopharyngeal tubes at high-flow or high-peak inspiratory pressure, proximal airway pressure measurements markedly overestimated oropharyngeal pressure. Comparing measured and calculated maximum and minimum oropharyngeal pressure couples yielded root mean square deviations less than 0.5 cmH₂ O regardless of ventilatory modality, nasopharyngeal tube diameter, flow rate, gas composition, and leak size.

Conclusion

During nasopharyngeal tube-assisted anesthesia, proximal airway pressure readings on the anesthetic monitoring machine overestimate oropharyngeal pressure especially for smaller-diameter nasopharyngeal tubes and higher flow, and to a lesser extent for large leaks. Given the importance of calculating oropharyngeal pressure in guiding nasopharyngeal tube ventilation in clinical practice, we propose an accurate calculation using Rohrer's equation method, or approximating oropharyngeal pressure from flow and pressure readings on the anesthetic machine using the ΔP_NPT charts.

SUBMITTER: Papoff P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8252547 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The dataset associate with the report is the flow experiment data acquired to evaluate the effect of density, viscosity, and surface tension on flow regime and pressure drop of two-phase flow in a horizontal pipe. To collect the data, experiments were conducted using a horizontal flow loop of 9.15 m (30 ft.) pipe length and 0.0254 m (1 inch) pipe diameter with a two-phase air/liquid system. The effect of surface tension was introduced by varying surface tension using the surfactant solution, the viscosity was varied using glycerin, and density was varied by the addition of calcium bromide. The superficial velocity of the liquid ranges from 0 to 3.048 m/sec (0-10 ft/s) and superficial gas velocity ranges from 0 to 18.288 m/sec (0-60 ft/s) respectively. The flow experiments were conducted at a constant liquid flow rate (fixing liquid rate) and varying the gas rate from minimum to the maximum value in a step-wise manner and then reducing the gas rate from maximum to minimum to see the presence of hysteresis effect. At each step of the experiment, the steady-state condition was observed based on the flow rate and pressure response and data were gather to have sufficient data points. Also, the video of the flow pattern was recorded using a high-speed camera for flow regime identification. Numerous sets of experiments were conducted to capture the ranges of superficial liquid and superficial gas velocity, density (1-1.5 gm/cc), viscosity (1-3.1 cP), and surface tension (32-70 mN/m). The data was used to develop the flow-regime map for the different cases and the effect of density, viscosity, and surface tension on flow regime and pressure drop were evaluated based on the boundary transition between different flow regimes. The pressure contour maps were generated to correlate with the flow regime map and their boundary transition. Also, a comparison of the generated data with the models in the literature is presented. Knowledge of flow regime type is essential for accurate prediction of the pressure drop in multiphase flow. However, to generate these maps a large quantity of experimental data is required and it is not feasible to evaluate the effect of each parameter on the flow regime map and boundary transition. This data-set is important in addressing the effect of fluid properties on two-phase horizontal flow also it will be a potential data-set for comparison as well as the development of multiphase flow modeling.

Project description:BackgroundTransvalvular pressure drops are assessed using Doppler echocardiography for the diagnosis of heart valve disease. However, this method is highly user-dependent and may overestimate transvalvular pressure drops by up to 54%. This work aimed to assess transvalvular pressure drops using velocity fields derived from blood speckle imaging (BSI), as a potential alternative to Doppler. METHODS: A silicone 3D-printed aortic valve model, segmented from a healthy CT scan, was placed within a silicone tube. A CardioFlow 5000MR flow pump was used to circulate blood mimicking fluid to create eight different stenotic conditions. Eight PendoTech pressure sensors were embedded along the tube wall to record ground-truth pressures (10 kHz). The simplified Bernoulli equation with measured probe angle correction was used to estimate pressure drop from maximum velocity values acquired across the valve using Doppler and BSI with a GE Vivid E95 ultrasound machine and 6S-D cardiac phased array transducer.ResultsThere were no significant differences between pressure drops estimated by Doppler, BSI and ground-truth at the lowest stenotic condition (10.4 ± 1.76, 10.3 ± 1.63 vs. 10.5 ± 1.00 mmHg, respectively; p > 0.05). Significant differences were observed between the pressure drops estimated by the three methods at the greatest stenotic condition (26.4 ± 1.52, 14.5 ± 2.14 vs. 20.9 ± 1.92 mmHg for Doppler, BSI and ground-truth, respectively; p < 0.05). Across all conditions, Doppler overestimated pressure drop (Bias = 3.92 mmHg), while BSI underestimated pressure drop (Bias = -3.31 mmHg).ConclusionsBSI accurately estimated pressure drops only up to 10.5 mmHg in controlled phantom conditions of low stenotic burden. Doppler overestimated pressure drops of 20.9 mmHg. Although BSI offers a number of theoretical advantages to conventional Doppler echocardiography, further refinements and clinical studies are required with BSI before it can be used to improve transvalvular pressure drop estimation in the clinical evaluation of aortic stenosis.