Cargando…

Inspiratory response and side-effects to rapid bilateral magnetic phrenic nerve stimulation using differently shaped coils: implications for stimulation-assisted mechanical ventilation

BACKGROUND: Rapid magnetic stimulation (RMS) of the phrenic nerves may serve to attenuate diaphragm atrophy during mechanical ventilation. With different coil shapes and stimulation location, inspiratory responses and side-effects may differ. This study aimed to compare the inspiratory and sensory r...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Boyle, Kyle G. P. J. M., Eichenberger, Philipp A., Schön, Patrick, Spengler, Christina M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9758474/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36528761
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12931-022-02251-y
_version_ 1784852047490711552
author Boyle, Kyle G. P. J. M.
Eichenberger, Philipp A.
Schön, Patrick
Spengler, Christina M.
author_facet Boyle, Kyle G. P. J. M.
Eichenberger, Philipp A.
Schön, Patrick
Spengler, Christina M.
author_sort Boyle, Kyle G. P. J. M.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Rapid magnetic stimulation (RMS) of the phrenic nerves may serve to attenuate diaphragm atrophy during mechanical ventilation. With different coil shapes and stimulation location, inspiratory responses and side-effects may differ. This study aimed to compare the inspiratory and sensory responses of three different RMS-coils either used bilaterally on the neck or on the chest, and to determine if ventilation over 10 min can be achieved without muscle fatigue and coils overheating. METHODS: Healthy participants underwent bilateral anterior 1-s RMS on the neck (RMS(BAMPS)) (N = 14) with three different pairs of magnetic coils (parabolic, D-shape, butterfly) at 15, 20, 25 and 30 Hz stimulator-frequency and 20% stimulator-output with + 10% increments. The D-shape coil with individual optimal stimulation settings was then used to ventilate participants (N = 11) for up to 10 min. Anterior RMS on the chest (RMS(aMS)) (N = 8) was conducted on an optional visit. Airflow was assessed via pneumotach and transdiaphragmatic pressure via oesophageal and gastric balloon catheters. Perception of air hunger, pain, discomfort and paresthesia were measured with a numerical scale. RESULTS: Inspiration was induced via RMS(BAMPS) in 86% of participants with all coils and via RMS(aMS) in only one participant with the parabolic coil. All coils produced similar inspiratory and sensory responses during RMS(BAMPS) with the butterfly coil needing higher stimulator-output, which resulted in significantly larger discomfort ratings at maximal inspiratory responses. Ten of 11 participants achieved 10 min of ventilation without decreases in minute ventilation (15.7 ± 4.6 L/min). CONCLUSIONS: RMS(BAMPS) was more effective than RMS(aMS,) and could temporarily ventilate humans seemingly without development of muscular fatigue. Trial registration This study was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04176744). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12931-022-02251-y.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9758474
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97584742022-12-18 Inspiratory response and side-effects to rapid bilateral magnetic phrenic nerve stimulation using differently shaped coils: implications for stimulation-assisted mechanical ventilation Boyle, Kyle G. P. J. M. Eichenberger, Philipp A. Schön, Patrick Spengler, Christina M. Respir Res Research BACKGROUND: Rapid magnetic stimulation (RMS) of the phrenic nerves may serve to attenuate diaphragm atrophy during mechanical ventilation. With different coil shapes and stimulation location, inspiratory responses and side-effects may differ. This study aimed to compare the inspiratory and sensory responses of three different RMS-coils either used bilaterally on the neck or on the chest, and to determine if ventilation over 10 min can be achieved without muscle fatigue and coils overheating. METHODS: Healthy participants underwent bilateral anterior 1-s RMS on the neck (RMS(BAMPS)) (N = 14) with three different pairs of magnetic coils (parabolic, D-shape, butterfly) at 15, 20, 25 and 30 Hz stimulator-frequency and 20% stimulator-output with + 10% increments. The D-shape coil with individual optimal stimulation settings was then used to ventilate participants (N = 11) for up to 10 min. Anterior RMS on the chest (RMS(aMS)) (N = 8) was conducted on an optional visit. Airflow was assessed via pneumotach and transdiaphragmatic pressure via oesophageal and gastric balloon catheters. Perception of air hunger, pain, discomfort and paresthesia were measured with a numerical scale. RESULTS: Inspiration was induced via RMS(BAMPS) in 86% of participants with all coils and via RMS(aMS) in only one participant with the parabolic coil. All coils produced similar inspiratory and sensory responses during RMS(BAMPS) with the butterfly coil needing higher stimulator-output, which resulted in significantly larger discomfort ratings at maximal inspiratory responses. Ten of 11 participants achieved 10 min of ventilation without decreases in minute ventilation (15.7 ± 4.6 L/min). CONCLUSIONS: RMS(BAMPS) was more effective than RMS(aMS,) and could temporarily ventilate humans seemingly without development of muscular fatigue. Trial registration This study was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04176744). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12931-022-02251-y. BioMed Central 2022-12-17 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9758474/ /pubmed/36528761 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12931-022-02251-y Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Boyle, Kyle G. P. J. M.
Eichenberger, Philipp A.
Schön, Patrick
Spengler, Christina M.
Inspiratory response and side-effects to rapid bilateral magnetic phrenic nerve stimulation using differently shaped coils: implications for stimulation-assisted mechanical ventilation
title Inspiratory response and side-effects to rapid bilateral magnetic phrenic nerve stimulation using differently shaped coils: implications for stimulation-assisted mechanical ventilation
title_full Inspiratory response and side-effects to rapid bilateral magnetic phrenic nerve stimulation using differently shaped coils: implications for stimulation-assisted mechanical ventilation
title_fullStr Inspiratory response and side-effects to rapid bilateral magnetic phrenic nerve stimulation using differently shaped coils: implications for stimulation-assisted mechanical ventilation
title_full_unstemmed Inspiratory response and side-effects to rapid bilateral magnetic phrenic nerve stimulation using differently shaped coils: implications for stimulation-assisted mechanical ventilation
title_short Inspiratory response and side-effects to rapid bilateral magnetic phrenic nerve stimulation using differently shaped coils: implications for stimulation-assisted mechanical ventilation
title_sort inspiratory response and side-effects to rapid bilateral magnetic phrenic nerve stimulation using differently shaped coils: implications for stimulation-assisted mechanical ventilation
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9758474/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36528761
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12931-022-02251-y
work_keys_str_mv AT boylekylegpjm inspiratoryresponseandsideeffectstorapidbilateralmagneticphrenicnervestimulationusingdifferentlyshapedcoilsimplicationsforstimulationassistedmechanicalventilation
AT eichenbergerphilippa inspiratoryresponseandsideeffectstorapidbilateralmagneticphrenicnervestimulationusingdifferentlyshapedcoilsimplicationsforstimulationassistedmechanicalventilation
AT schonpatrick inspiratoryresponseandsideeffectstorapidbilateralmagneticphrenicnervestimulationusingdifferentlyshapedcoilsimplicationsforstimulationassistedmechanicalventilation
AT spenglerchristinam inspiratoryresponseandsideeffectstorapidbilateralmagneticphrenicnervestimulationusingdifferentlyshapedcoilsimplicationsforstimulationassistedmechanicalventilation