Lellouche François, Qader Siham, Taillé Solenne, Lyazidi Aissam, Brochard Laurent
Service de Réanimation Médicale, AP-HP, Centre Hospitalier Albert Chenevier, Hôpitaux Universitaires Henri Mondor, Créteil, France.
Respir Care. 2014 May;59(5):637-43. doi: 10.4187/respcare.02523. Epub 2013 Oct 8.
During invasive mechanical ventilation, inspired gases must be humidified. We previously showed that high ambient temperature greatly impaired the hygrometric performance of heated wire-heated humidifiers. The aim of this bench and clinical study was to assess the humidification performance of passive and active heat and moisture exchangers (HMEs) and the impact of ambient temperature and ventilator settings.
We first tested on the bench a device with passive and active humidification properties (Humid-Heat, Teleflex), and 2 passive hydrophobic/hygroscopic HMEs (Hygrobac and Hygrobac S, Tyco Healthcare). The devices were tested at 3 different ambient temperatures (from 22 to 30 °C), and at 2 minute ventilation settings (10 and 20 L/min). Inspired gas hygrometry was measured at the Y-piece with the psychrometric method. In addition to the bench study, we measured the hygrometry of inspired gases in 2 different clinical studies. In 15 mechanically ventilated patients, we evaluated Humid-Heat at different settings. Additionally, we evaluated Humid-Heat and compared it with Hygrobac in a crossover study in 10 patients.
On the bench, with the Hygrobac and Hygrobac S the inspired absolute humidity was ∼ 30 mg H2O/L, and with the Humid-Heat, slightly < 35 mg H2O/L. Ambient temperature and minute ventilation did not have a clinically important difference on the performance of the tested devices. During the clinical evaluation, Humid-Heat provided inspired humidity in a range from 28.5 to 42.0 mg H2O/L, depending on settings, and was only weakly influenced by the patient's body temperature.
In this study both passive and active HMEs had stable humidification performance with negligible influence of ambient temperature and minute ventilation. This contrasts with previous findings with heated wire-heated humidifiers. Although there are no clear data demonstrating that higher humidification impacts outcomes, it is worth noting that humidity was significantly higher with the active HME.
在有创机械通气期间,吸入气体必须进行湿化。我们之前的研究表明,高环境温度会严重损害热丝加热加湿器的湿度调节性能。本实验台及临床研究的目的是评估被动式和主动式热湿交换器(HME)的湿化性能以及环境温度和呼吸机设置的影响。
我们首先在实验台上测试了一种具有被动和主动湿化特性的设备(Humid-Heat,泰利福公司)以及两种被动式疏水/吸湿HME(Hygrobac和Hygrobac S,泰科医疗公司)。这些设备在3种不同的环境温度(22至30°C)和2种分钟通气设置(10和20L/分钟)下进行测试。采用干湿球法在Y形接头处测量吸入气体湿度。除了实验台研究外,我们还在2项不同的临床研究中测量了吸入气体的湿度。在15例机械通气患者中,我们评估了不同设置下的Humid-Heat。此外,我们在10例患者的交叉研究中评估了Humid-Heat并将其与Hygrobac进行比较。
在实验台上,使用Hygrobac和Hygrobac S时,吸入气体的绝对湿度约为30mg H2O/L,使用Humid-Heat时略低于35mg H2O/L。环境温度和分钟通气量对测试设备的性能没有临床重要差异。在临床评估中,根据设置不同,Humid-Heat提供的吸入气体湿度范围为28.5至42.0mg H2O/L,且仅受患者体温的微弱影响。
在本研究中,被动式和主动式HME均具有稳定的湿化性能,环境温度和分钟通气量的影响可忽略不计。这与之前热丝加热加湿器的研究结果形成对比。尽管没有明确数据表明更高的湿化水平会影响治疗结果,但值得注意的是,主动式HME的湿度明显更高。