Cargando…

Subject–ventilator synchrony during neural versus pneumatically triggered non-invasive helmet ventilation

OBJECTIVE: Patient–ventilator synchrony during non-invasive pressure support ventilation with the helmet device is often compromised when conventional pneumatic triggering and cycling-off were used. A possible solution to this shortcoming is to replace the pneumatic triggering with neural triggering...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Moerer, Onnen, Beck, Jennifer, Brander, Lukas, Costa, Roberta, Quintel, Michael, Slutsky, Arthur S., Brunet, Fabrice, Sinderby, Christer
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer-Verlag 2008
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2517084/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18512045
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00134-008-1163-z
_version_ 1782158508088623104
author Moerer, Onnen
Beck, Jennifer
Brander, Lukas
Costa, Roberta
Quintel, Michael
Slutsky, Arthur S.
Brunet, Fabrice
Sinderby, Christer
author_facet Moerer, Onnen
Beck, Jennifer
Brander, Lukas
Costa, Roberta
Quintel, Michael
Slutsky, Arthur S.
Brunet, Fabrice
Sinderby, Christer
author_sort Moerer, Onnen
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Patient–ventilator synchrony during non-invasive pressure support ventilation with the helmet device is often compromised when conventional pneumatic triggering and cycling-off were used. A possible solution to this shortcoming is to replace the pneumatic triggering with neural triggering and cycling-off—using the diaphragm electrical activity (EA(di)). This signal is insensitive to leaks and to the compliance of the ventilator circuit. DESIGN: Randomized, single-blinded, experimental study. SETTING: University Hospital. PARTICIPANTS AND SUBJECTS: Seven healthy human volunteers. INTERVENTIONS: Pneumatic triggering and cycling-off were compared to neural triggering and cycling-off during NIV delivered with the helmet. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Triggering and cycling-off delays, wasted efforts, and breathing comfort were determined during restricted breathing efforts (<20% of voluntary maximum EA(di)) with various combinations of pressure support (PSV) (5, 10, 20 cm H(2)O) and respiratory rates (10, 20, 30 breath/min). During pneumatic triggering and cycling-off, the subject–ventilator synchrony was progressively more impaired with increasing respiratory rate and levels of PSV (p < 0.001). During neural triggering and cycling-off, effect of increasing respiratory rate and levels of PSV on subject–ventilator synchrony was minimal. Breathing comfort was higher during neural triggering than during pneumatic triggering (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrates in healthy subjects that subject–ventilator synchrony, trigger effort, and breathing comfort with a helmet interface are considerably less impaired during increasing levels of PSV and respiratory rates with neural triggering and cycling-off, compared to conventional pneumatic triggering and cycling-off. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00134-008-1163-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Text
id pubmed-2517084
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2008
publisher Springer-Verlag
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-25170842008-08-18 Subject–ventilator synchrony during neural versus pneumatically triggered non-invasive helmet ventilation Moerer, Onnen Beck, Jennifer Brander, Lukas Costa, Roberta Quintel, Michael Slutsky, Arthur S. Brunet, Fabrice Sinderby, Christer Intensive Care Med Original OBJECTIVE: Patient–ventilator synchrony during non-invasive pressure support ventilation with the helmet device is often compromised when conventional pneumatic triggering and cycling-off were used. A possible solution to this shortcoming is to replace the pneumatic triggering with neural triggering and cycling-off—using the diaphragm electrical activity (EA(di)). This signal is insensitive to leaks and to the compliance of the ventilator circuit. DESIGN: Randomized, single-blinded, experimental study. SETTING: University Hospital. PARTICIPANTS AND SUBJECTS: Seven healthy human volunteers. INTERVENTIONS: Pneumatic triggering and cycling-off were compared to neural triggering and cycling-off during NIV delivered with the helmet. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Triggering and cycling-off delays, wasted efforts, and breathing comfort were determined during restricted breathing efforts (<20% of voluntary maximum EA(di)) with various combinations of pressure support (PSV) (5, 10, 20 cm H(2)O) and respiratory rates (10, 20, 30 breath/min). During pneumatic triggering and cycling-off, the subject–ventilator synchrony was progressively more impaired with increasing respiratory rate and levels of PSV (p < 0.001). During neural triggering and cycling-off, effect of increasing respiratory rate and levels of PSV on subject–ventilator synchrony was minimal. Breathing comfort was higher during neural triggering than during pneumatic triggering (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrates in healthy subjects that subject–ventilator synchrony, trigger effort, and breathing comfort with a helmet interface are considerably less impaired during increasing levels of PSV and respiratory rates with neural triggering and cycling-off, compared to conventional pneumatic triggering and cycling-off. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00134-008-1163-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer-Verlag 2008-05-30 2008 /pmc/articles/PMC2517084/ /pubmed/18512045 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00134-008-1163-z Text en © The Author(s) 2008 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
spellingShingle Original
Moerer, Onnen
Beck, Jennifer
Brander, Lukas
Costa, Roberta
Quintel, Michael
Slutsky, Arthur S.
Brunet, Fabrice
Sinderby, Christer
Subject–ventilator synchrony during neural versus pneumatically triggered non-invasive helmet ventilation
title Subject–ventilator synchrony during neural versus pneumatically triggered non-invasive helmet ventilation
title_full Subject–ventilator synchrony during neural versus pneumatically triggered non-invasive helmet ventilation
title_fullStr Subject–ventilator synchrony during neural versus pneumatically triggered non-invasive helmet ventilation
title_full_unstemmed Subject–ventilator synchrony during neural versus pneumatically triggered non-invasive helmet ventilation
title_short Subject–ventilator synchrony during neural versus pneumatically triggered non-invasive helmet ventilation
title_sort subject–ventilator synchrony during neural versus pneumatically triggered non-invasive helmet ventilation
topic Original
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2517084/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18512045
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00134-008-1163-z
work_keys_str_mv AT moereronnen subjectventilatorsynchronyduringneuralversuspneumaticallytriggerednoninvasivehelmetventilation
AT beckjennifer subjectventilatorsynchronyduringneuralversuspneumaticallytriggerednoninvasivehelmetventilation
AT branderlukas subjectventilatorsynchronyduringneuralversuspneumaticallytriggerednoninvasivehelmetventilation
AT costaroberta subjectventilatorsynchronyduringneuralversuspneumaticallytriggerednoninvasivehelmetventilation
AT quintelmichael subjectventilatorsynchronyduringneuralversuspneumaticallytriggerednoninvasivehelmetventilation
AT slutskyarthurs subjectventilatorsynchronyduringneuralversuspneumaticallytriggerednoninvasivehelmetventilation
AT brunetfabrice subjectventilatorsynchronyduringneuralversuspneumaticallytriggerednoninvasivehelmetventilation
AT sinderbychrister subjectventilatorsynchronyduringneuralversuspneumaticallytriggerednoninvasivehelmetventilation