Borg Ulf, Aviano Jeffrey, Ginani Milan, Li Kun
Department of Medical Science, Respiratory Interventions, Medtronic, Boulder, CO, USA.
Department of Research and Development, Respiratory Interventions, Medtronic, Carlsbad, CA, USA.
Med Devices (Auckl). 2022 Sep 1;15:307-315. doi: 10.2147/MDER.S374418. eCollection 2022.
Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) may reduce intubation rates and be especially beneficial in the care of preterm infants, in addition to other care modalities. Currently, ventilators do not display the pressure at the nares but the pressure in the ventilator tubing system. There are several nasal cannulas available for use to deliver NIV. The purpose of this study was to compare the inspiratory pressure on the ventilator to the measured pressure delivered at the nares using three cannula brands (Manufacturer A, Fisher & Paykel; Manufacturer B, Neotech RAM; and Manufacturer C, Hudson RCI).
This bench study utilized a 3D printed nasal model, including nares in multiple sizes to accommodate all nasal prongs studied. The nasal adaptors were connected to neonatal test lungs, to simulate patient breathing. Multiple sizes of nasal cannulas from the three manufacturers were tested for inspiratory vs delivered pressure at the patient side of the cannula, using eight combinations of ventilator settings. Each nasal cannula was tested on six Puritan Bennett™ 980 ventilators.
The measured delivered pressure at the nares was consistently lower than the clinician-set inspiratory pressure. Across all ventilator settings, 7 of the 11 cannulas delivered significantly less pressure at the nares compared to the inspiratory ventilator pressure (p < 0.01). For each cannula, as inspiratory pressure increased, the difference between delivered and inspiratory pressures also increased. The cannula from Manufacturer B consistently demonstrated the greatest differences between set inspiratory and delivered pressures for each ventilator setting.
This study demonstrated substantial differences between ventilator inspiratory pressure and measured delivered pressure, which may have clinical significance. Being unaware of the actual airway pressure delivered to the patient may lead to erroneous adjustments to the level of ventilator pressure, which may be especially consequential to those with delicate and developing respiratory systems.
无创通气(NIV)除其他护理方式外,可能会降低插管率,对早产儿护理尤其有益。目前,呼吸机显示的不是鼻孔处的压力,而是呼吸机管路系统中的压力。有几种鼻导管可用于提供无创通气。本研究的目的是比较使用三种鼻导管品牌(制造商A,费雪派克;制造商B,Neotech RAM;制造商C,哈德逊RCI)时呼吸机上的吸气压力与鼻孔处测得的输送压力。
本实验研究使用了一个3D打印的鼻腔模型,包括多种尺寸的鼻孔以适配所有研究的鼻叉。鼻适配器连接到新生儿测试肺,以模拟患者呼吸。对来自三个制造商的多种尺寸鼻导管,使用八种呼吸机设置组合,测试鼻导管患者端的吸气压力与输送压力。每种鼻导管在六台伟康™980呼吸机上进行测试。
鼻孔处测得的输送压力始终低于临床医生设置的吸气压力。在所有呼吸机设置中,11根鼻导管中有7根在鼻孔处输送的压力明显低于呼吸机吸气压力(p < 0.01)。对于每根鼻导管,随着吸气压力增加,输送压力与吸气压力之间的差异也增加。制造商B的鼻导管在每种呼吸机设置下,设定吸气压力与输送压力之间的差异始终最大。
本研究表明呼吸机吸气压力与测得的输送压力之间存在显著差异,这可能具有临床意义。未意识到输送给患者的实际气道压力可能会导致对呼吸机压力水平的错误调整,这对于呼吸系统脆弱且正在发育的患者可能尤其重要。