Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, San Gerardo Hospital, Monza, Italy.
Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milan-Bicocca, Monza, Italy.
J Clin Monit Comput. 2020 Jun;34(3):553-558. doi: 10.1007/s10877-019-00348-2. Epub 2019 Jul 5.
Electrical impedance tomography (EIT) is used for bedside ventilation monitoring; cardiac related impedance changes represent a source of noise superimposed on the ventilation signal, commonly removed by low-pass filtering (LPF). We investigated if an alternative approach, based on an event-triggered averaging (ETA) process, is more effective at preserving the actual ventilation waveform. Ten paralyzed patients undergoing volume-controlled ventilation were studied; 30 breaths for each patient were identified to compare LPF and ETA. For ETA the identified breaths were temporally aligned on the beginning of inspiration; the values of the thirty curves at each time point were averaged. The analysis was conducted on the global EIT signal and on four ventral-to-dorsal regions of interest. Global tidal variations by ETA resulted higher than LPF (average difference 139 ± 88 arbitrary units, p = 0.004). Both for global and regional waveforms, minimum and maximum EIT slopes were steeper by ETA as compared to LPF (average difference respectively - 57 ± 60 mL/s and 144 ± 96 mL/s for global signal, p < 0.05); ventilator inspiratory peak airflow correlated with maximum slope measured by ETA (r = 0.902, p < 0.001), but not LPF (p = 0.319). Beginning of inspiration identified on the ventilator waveform and on the global EIT signal by ETA occurred simultaneously, (+ 0.04 ± 0.07 s, p = 0.081), while occurred earlier by LPF (- 0.26 ± 0.1 s, p < 0.001). Removal of cardiac related impedance changes by ETA results in a ventilation signal more similar to the waveforms recorded by the ventilator, particularly regarding the slope of impedance changes and time at the minimum values as compared to LPF.
电阻抗断层成像(EIT)用于床边通气监测;与心脏相关的阻抗变化是叠加在通气信号上的噪声源,通常通过低通滤波(LPF)去除。我们研究了基于事件触发平均(ETA)过程的替代方法是否更有效地保留实际通气波形。十名接受容量控制通气的麻痹患者接受了研究;为每位患者比较 LPF 和 ETA 识别了 30 次呼吸。对于 ETA,识别出的呼吸在吸气开始时进行时间对齐;在每个时间点对三十条曲线的值进行平均。分析在全局 EIT 信号和四个从腹侧向背侧的感兴趣区域上进行。ETA 导致的全局潮气量变化高于 LPF(平均差异 139±88 个任意单位,p=0.004)。与 LPF 相比,ETA 下全局和区域波形的最小和最大 EIT 斜率更陡(全局信号的平均差异分别为-57±60 mL/s 和 144±96 mL/s,p<0.05);ETA 测量的呼吸机吸气峰流速与最大斜率相关(r=0.902,p<0.001),但与 LPF 无关(p=0.319)。ETA 在呼吸机波形和全局 EIT 信号上识别的吸气开始时间同步(+0.04±0.07 s,p=0.081),而 LPF 则更早(-0.26±0.1 s,p<0.001)。ETA 去除与心脏相关的阻抗变化会导致通气信号与呼吸机记录的波形更相似,特别是与阻抗变化的斜率和最小值的时间相比,与 LPF 相比。