Cargando…

Volatile organic compound profiles in outlet air from extracorporeal life-support devices differ from breath profiles in critically ill patients

INTRODUCTION: It is highly uncertain whether volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in exhaled breath of critically ill intensive care unit patients are formed in the lung locally, in the air compartment or lung tissue, or elsewhere in the body and transported to the lung via the bloodstream. We compared...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Leopold, Jan Hendrik, Philipp, Alois, Bein, Thomas, Redel, Andreas, Gruber, Michael, Schultz, Marcus J., Abu-Hanna, Ameen, Brinkman, Paul, Janssen, Hans-Gerd, Bos, Lieuwe D.J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: European Respiratory Society 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6441674/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30949490
http://dx.doi.org/10.1183/23120541.00134-2018
_version_ 1783407581176266752
author Leopold, Jan Hendrik
Philipp, Alois
Bein, Thomas
Redel, Andreas
Gruber, Michael
Schultz, Marcus J.
Abu-Hanna, Ameen
Brinkman, Paul
Janssen, Hans-Gerd
Bos, Lieuwe D.J.
author_facet Leopold, Jan Hendrik
Philipp, Alois
Bein, Thomas
Redel, Andreas
Gruber, Michael
Schultz, Marcus J.
Abu-Hanna, Ameen
Brinkman, Paul
Janssen, Hans-Gerd
Bos, Lieuwe D.J.
author_sort Leopold, Jan Hendrik
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: It is highly uncertain whether volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in exhaled breath of critically ill intensive care unit patients are formed in the lung locally, in the air compartment or lung tissue, or elsewhere in the body and transported to the lung via the bloodstream. We compared VOC mixtures in exhaled breath and in air coming from extracorporeal support devices in critically ill patients to address this issue. METHODS: First, we investigated whether it was safe to connect an electronic nose (eNose) or a gas sampling pump to extracorporeal support membranes. Then, breath and air from extracorporeal support devices were collected simultaneously for continuous monitoring of VOC mixtures using an eNose. In addition, samples for gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC-MS) analysis were taken daily at the two measurement sites. RESULTS: 10 critically ill patients were monitored for a median (interquartile range) duration of 73 (72–113) h; in total, we had 887 h of air sampling. The eNose signals of breath correlated moderately with signals of air from the extracorporeal support devices (R(2)=0.25–0.44). After GC-MS analysis, 96 VOCs were found both in breath and air from the extracorporeal support devices; of these, 29 (30%) showed a significant correlation (p<0.05) between the two measurement sites, of which 17 were identified. VOCs that did not correlate were found in a higher concentration in breath than in air from the extracorporeal support devices. CONCLUSION: This study suggests VOC analysis in the extracorporeal circulation is safe, and that VOCs of nonpulmonary origin can be measured in the breath and in the extracorporeal circulation of critically ill patients. For VOCs that did not correlate between the two measurement sites, the breath concentration was higher, suggesting pulmonary production of these molecules in a highly selected population of patients that received extracorporeal support.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6441674
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher European Respiratory Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64416742019-04-04 Volatile organic compound profiles in outlet air from extracorporeal life-support devices differ from breath profiles in critically ill patients Leopold, Jan Hendrik Philipp, Alois Bein, Thomas Redel, Andreas Gruber, Michael Schultz, Marcus J. Abu-Hanna, Ameen Brinkman, Paul Janssen, Hans-Gerd Bos, Lieuwe D.J. ERJ Open Res Original Articles INTRODUCTION: It is highly uncertain whether volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in exhaled breath of critically ill intensive care unit patients are formed in the lung locally, in the air compartment or lung tissue, or elsewhere in the body and transported to the lung via the bloodstream. We compared VOC mixtures in exhaled breath and in air coming from extracorporeal support devices in critically ill patients to address this issue. METHODS: First, we investigated whether it was safe to connect an electronic nose (eNose) or a gas sampling pump to extracorporeal support membranes. Then, breath and air from extracorporeal support devices were collected simultaneously for continuous monitoring of VOC mixtures using an eNose. In addition, samples for gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC-MS) analysis were taken daily at the two measurement sites. RESULTS: 10 critically ill patients were monitored for a median (interquartile range) duration of 73 (72–113) h; in total, we had 887 h of air sampling. The eNose signals of breath correlated moderately with signals of air from the extracorporeal support devices (R(2)=0.25–0.44). After GC-MS analysis, 96 VOCs were found both in breath and air from the extracorporeal support devices; of these, 29 (30%) showed a significant correlation (p<0.05) between the two measurement sites, of which 17 were identified. VOCs that did not correlate were found in a higher concentration in breath than in air from the extracorporeal support devices. CONCLUSION: This study suggests VOC analysis in the extracorporeal circulation is safe, and that VOCs of nonpulmonary origin can be measured in the breath and in the extracorporeal circulation of critically ill patients. For VOCs that did not correlate between the two measurement sites, the breath concentration was higher, suggesting pulmonary production of these molecules in a highly selected population of patients that received extracorporeal support. European Respiratory Society 2019-04-01 /pmc/articles/PMC6441674/ /pubmed/30949490 http://dx.doi.org/10.1183/23120541.00134-2018 Text en Copyright ©ERS 2019 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Leopold, Jan Hendrik
Philipp, Alois
Bein, Thomas
Redel, Andreas
Gruber, Michael
Schultz, Marcus J.
Abu-Hanna, Ameen
Brinkman, Paul
Janssen, Hans-Gerd
Bos, Lieuwe D.J.
Volatile organic compound profiles in outlet air from extracorporeal life-support devices differ from breath profiles in critically ill patients
title Volatile organic compound profiles in outlet air from extracorporeal life-support devices differ from breath profiles in critically ill patients
title_full Volatile organic compound profiles in outlet air from extracorporeal life-support devices differ from breath profiles in critically ill patients
title_fullStr Volatile organic compound profiles in outlet air from extracorporeal life-support devices differ from breath profiles in critically ill patients
title_full_unstemmed Volatile organic compound profiles in outlet air from extracorporeal life-support devices differ from breath profiles in critically ill patients
title_short Volatile organic compound profiles in outlet air from extracorporeal life-support devices differ from breath profiles in critically ill patients
title_sort volatile organic compound profiles in outlet air from extracorporeal life-support devices differ from breath profiles in critically ill patients
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6441674/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30949490
http://dx.doi.org/10.1183/23120541.00134-2018
work_keys_str_mv AT leopoldjanhendrik volatileorganiccompoundprofilesinoutletairfromextracorporeallifesupportdevicesdifferfrombreathprofilesincriticallyillpatients
AT philippalois volatileorganiccompoundprofilesinoutletairfromextracorporeallifesupportdevicesdifferfrombreathprofilesincriticallyillpatients
AT beinthomas volatileorganiccompoundprofilesinoutletairfromextracorporeallifesupportdevicesdifferfrombreathprofilesincriticallyillpatients
AT redelandreas volatileorganiccompoundprofilesinoutletairfromextracorporeallifesupportdevicesdifferfrombreathprofilesincriticallyillpatients
AT grubermichael volatileorganiccompoundprofilesinoutletairfromextracorporeallifesupportdevicesdifferfrombreathprofilesincriticallyillpatients
AT schultzmarcusj volatileorganiccompoundprofilesinoutletairfromextracorporeallifesupportdevicesdifferfrombreathprofilesincriticallyillpatients
AT abuhannaameen volatileorganiccompoundprofilesinoutletairfromextracorporeallifesupportdevicesdifferfrombreathprofilesincriticallyillpatients
AT brinkmanpaul volatileorganiccompoundprofilesinoutletairfromextracorporeallifesupportdevicesdifferfrombreathprofilesincriticallyillpatients
AT janssenhansgerd volatileorganiccompoundprofilesinoutletairfromextracorporeallifesupportdevicesdifferfrombreathprofilesincriticallyillpatients
AT boslieuwedj volatileorganiccompoundprofilesinoutletairfromextracorporeallifesupportdevicesdifferfrombreathprofilesincriticallyillpatients