Nikuri Petra, Maalouf Anthony, Geneid Ahmed, Pesonen Eero, Sanmark Enni, Vartiainen Ville A
Heart and Lung Center, Faculty of Medicine, Helsinki University Hospital, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Department of Otorhinolaryngology ja Phoniatrics - Head and Neck Surgery, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.
Sci Rep. 2025 Apr 23;15(1):14058. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-98751-0.
From the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been concern among clinicians whether the use of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) contributes to aerosol generation and consequently spreading of pathogens. Most guidelines still classify these treatments as high-risk aerosol-generating procedures. The aim of this study was to evaluate differences in aerosol emissions and exposure with CPAP and HFNC compared to no breathing aid (NBA). Aerosol emissions of 16 healthy volunteers using CPAP, HFNC and NBA were measured with a portable aerosol spectrometer. During each measurement, the volunteers were instructed consecutively to breathe normally, breathe deeply, cough and read aloud a predefined text. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used in statistical analysis. Non-invasive ventilation (CPAP, HFNC) does not produce significantly more aerosol than the same respiratory activities without a breathing aid (median CPAP-NBA - 4.54 1/L, p = 0.816, and HFNC-NBA 2.27 1/L, p = 0.244), deep breathing (median CPAP-NBA - 2.27 1/L, p = 0.378 and HFNC-NBA 4.55 1/L, p = 0.623), speaking (median CPAP-NBA 0 1/L, p = 0.0523 and HFNC-NBA 9.09 1/L, p = 0.0140), or coughing (median CPAP-NBA - 17.31 1/L, p = 0.587 and HFNC-NBA 1.92 1/L, p = 0.365). The results indicate that both CPAP and HFNC have no clinically meaningful impact on aerosol emission. Therefore, the use of CPAP or HFNC does not expose healthcare personnel to greater concentrations of aerosols when compared to normal breathing in healthy participants.
自新冠疫情开始以来,临床医生一直担心使用高流量鼻导管(HFNC)和持续气道正压通气(CPAP)是否会导致气溶胶产生,进而导致病原体传播。大多数指南仍将这些治疗归类为高风险气溶胶产生程序。本研究的目的是评估与无呼吸辅助(NBA)相比,CPAP和HFNC在气溶胶排放和暴露方面的差异。使用便携式气溶胶光谱仪测量了16名健康志愿者使用CPAP、HFNC和NBA时的气溶胶排放。在每次测量期间,连续指示志愿者正常呼吸、深呼吸、咳嗽并大声朗读一段预定义的文本。统计分析采用Wilcoxon符号秩检验。无创通气(CPAP、HFNC)产生的气溶胶并不比无呼吸辅助时的相同呼吸活动显著更多(CPAP与NBA相比的中位数为-4.54 1/L,p = 0.816,HFNC与NBA相比为2.27 1/L,p = 0.244),深呼吸(CPAP与NBA相比的中位数为-2.27 1/L,p = 0.378,HFNC与NBA相比为4.55 1/L,p = 0.623),说话(CPAP与NBA相比的中位数为0 1/L,p = 0.0523,HFNC与NBA相比为9.09 1/L,p = 0.0140),或咳嗽(CPAP与NBA相比的中位数为-17.31 1/L,p = 0.587,HFNC与NBA相比为1.92 1/L,p = 0.365)。结果表明,CPAP和HFNC对气溶胶排放均无临床意义上的影响。因此,与健康参与者的正常呼吸相比,使用CPAP或HFNC不会使医护人员暴露于更高浓度的气溶胶中。