Cargando…
Sharing Mechanical Ventilator: In Vitro Evaluation of Circuit Cross-Flows and Patient Interactions
During the COVID-19 pandemic, a shortage of mechanical ventilators was reported and ventilator sharing between patients was proposed as an ultimate solution. Two lung simulators were ventilated by one anesthesia machine connected through two respiratory circuits and T-pieces. Five different combinat...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8307053/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34357197 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes11070547 |
_version_ | 1783727958534389760 |
---|---|
author | Colombo, Sebastiano Maria Battistin, Michele Carlesso, Eleonora Vivona, Luigi Carfagna, Fabio Valsecchi, Carlo Florio, Gaetano Carenzo, Luca Tonetti, Tommaso Ranieri, Vito Marco Cecconi, Maurizio Pesenti, Antonio Grasselli, Giacomo Zanella, Alberto |
author_facet | Colombo, Sebastiano Maria Battistin, Michele Carlesso, Eleonora Vivona, Luigi Carfagna, Fabio Valsecchi, Carlo Florio, Gaetano Carenzo, Luca Tonetti, Tommaso Ranieri, Vito Marco Cecconi, Maurizio Pesenti, Antonio Grasselli, Giacomo Zanella, Alberto |
author_sort | Colombo, Sebastiano Maria |
collection | PubMed |
description | During the COVID-19 pandemic, a shortage of mechanical ventilators was reported and ventilator sharing between patients was proposed as an ultimate solution. Two lung simulators were ventilated by one anesthesia machine connected through two respiratory circuits and T-pieces. Five different combinations of compliances (30–50 mL × cmH(2)O(−1)) and resistances (5–20 cmH(2)O × L(−1) × s(−1)) were tested. The ventilation setting was: pressure-controlled ventilation, positive end-expiratory pressure 15 cmH(2)O, inspiratory pressure 10 cmH(2)O, respiratory rate 20 bpm. Pressures and flows from all the circuit sections have been recorded and analyzed. Simulated patients with equal compliance and resistance received similar ventilation. Compliance reduction from 50 to 30 mL × cmH(2)O(−1) decreased the tidal volume (V(T)) by 32% (418 ± 49 vs. 285 ± 17 mL). The resistance increase from 5 to 20 cmH(2)O × L(−1) × s(−1) decreased V(T) by 22% (425 ± 69 vs. 331 ± 51 mL). The maximal alveolar pressure was lower at higher compliance and resistance values and decreased linearly with the time constant (r² = 0.80, p < 0.001). The minimum alveolar pressure ranged from 15.5 ± 0.04 to 16.57 ± 0.04 cmH(2)O. Cross-flows between the simulated patients have been recorded in all the tested combinations, during both the inspiratory and expiratory phases. The simultaneous ventilation of two patients with one ventilator may be unable to match individual patient’s needs and has a high risk of cross-interference. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8307053 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-83070532021-07-25 Sharing Mechanical Ventilator: In Vitro Evaluation of Circuit Cross-Flows and Patient Interactions Colombo, Sebastiano Maria Battistin, Michele Carlesso, Eleonora Vivona, Luigi Carfagna, Fabio Valsecchi, Carlo Florio, Gaetano Carenzo, Luca Tonetti, Tommaso Ranieri, Vito Marco Cecconi, Maurizio Pesenti, Antonio Grasselli, Giacomo Zanella, Alberto Membranes (Basel) Article During the COVID-19 pandemic, a shortage of mechanical ventilators was reported and ventilator sharing between patients was proposed as an ultimate solution. Two lung simulators were ventilated by one anesthesia machine connected through two respiratory circuits and T-pieces. Five different combinations of compliances (30–50 mL × cmH(2)O(−1)) and resistances (5–20 cmH(2)O × L(−1) × s(−1)) were tested. The ventilation setting was: pressure-controlled ventilation, positive end-expiratory pressure 15 cmH(2)O, inspiratory pressure 10 cmH(2)O, respiratory rate 20 bpm. Pressures and flows from all the circuit sections have been recorded and analyzed. Simulated patients with equal compliance and resistance received similar ventilation. Compliance reduction from 50 to 30 mL × cmH(2)O(−1) decreased the tidal volume (V(T)) by 32% (418 ± 49 vs. 285 ± 17 mL). The resistance increase from 5 to 20 cmH(2)O × L(−1) × s(−1) decreased V(T) by 22% (425 ± 69 vs. 331 ± 51 mL). The maximal alveolar pressure was lower at higher compliance and resistance values and decreased linearly with the time constant (r² = 0.80, p < 0.001). The minimum alveolar pressure ranged from 15.5 ± 0.04 to 16.57 ± 0.04 cmH(2)O. Cross-flows between the simulated patients have been recorded in all the tested combinations, during both the inspiratory and expiratory phases. The simultaneous ventilation of two patients with one ventilator may be unable to match individual patient’s needs and has a high risk of cross-interference. MDPI 2021-07-20 /pmc/articles/PMC8307053/ /pubmed/34357197 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes11070547 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Colombo, Sebastiano Maria Battistin, Michele Carlesso, Eleonora Vivona, Luigi Carfagna, Fabio Valsecchi, Carlo Florio, Gaetano Carenzo, Luca Tonetti, Tommaso Ranieri, Vito Marco Cecconi, Maurizio Pesenti, Antonio Grasselli, Giacomo Zanella, Alberto Sharing Mechanical Ventilator: In Vitro Evaluation of Circuit Cross-Flows and Patient Interactions |
title | Sharing Mechanical Ventilator: In Vitro Evaluation of Circuit Cross-Flows and Patient Interactions |
title_full | Sharing Mechanical Ventilator: In Vitro Evaluation of Circuit Cross-Flows and Patient Interactions |
title_fullStr | Sharing Mechanical Ventilator: In Vitro Evaluation of Circuit Cross-Flows and Patient Interactions |
title_full_unstemmed | Sharing Mechanical Ventilator: In Vitro Evaluation of Circuit Cross-Flows and Patient Interactions |
title_short | Sharing Mechanical Ventilator: In Vitro Evaluation of Circuit Cross-Flows and Patient Interactions |
title_sort | sharing mechanical ventilator: in vitro evaluation of circuit cross-flows and patient interactions |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8307053/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34357197 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/membranes11070547 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT colombosebastianomaria sharingmechanicalventilatorinvitroevaluationofcircuitcrossflowsandpatientinteractions AT battistinmichele sharingmechanicalventilatorinvitroevaluationofcircuitcrossflowsandpatientinteractions AT carlessoeleonora sharingmechanicalventilatorinvitroevaluationofcircuitcrossflowsandpatientinteractions AT vivonaluigi sharingmechanicalventilatorinvitroevaluationofcircuitcrossflowsandpatientinteractions AT carfagnafabio sharingmechanicalventilatorinvitroevaluationofcircuitcrossflowsandpatientinteractions AT valsecchicarlo sharingmechanicalventilatorinvitroevaluationofcircuitcrossflowsandpatientinteractions AT floriogaetano sharingmechanicalventilatorinvitroevaluationofcircuitcrossflowsandpatientinteractions AT carenzoluca sharingmechanicalventilatorinvitroevaluationofcircuitcrossflowsandpatientinteractions AT tonettitommaso sharingmechanicalventilatorinvitroevaluationofcircuitcrossflowsandpatientinteractions AT ranierivitomarco sharingmechanicalventilatorinvitroevaluationofcircuitcrossflowsandpatientinteractions AT cecconimaurizio sharingmechanicalventilatorinvitroevaluationofcircuitcrossflowsandpatientinteractions AT pesentiantonio sharingmechanicalventilatorinvitroevaluationofcircuitcrossflowsandpatientinteractions AT grasselligiacomo sharingmechanicalventilatorinvitroevaluationofcircuitcrossflowsandpatientinteractions AT zanellaalberto sharingmechanicalventilatorinvitroevaluationofcircuitcrossflowsandpatientinteractions |