Federico Longhini1, Serena Scarlino2, Maria R Gallina2, Alice Monzani2,3, Simona DE Franco2, Erica C Grassino2, Gianni Bona3, Federica Ferrero4. 1. Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Sant'Andrea Hospital, ASL VC, Vercelli, Italy. 2. Unit of Neonatal Intensive Care, Maggiore della Carità Hospital, Novara, Italy. 3. Division of Pediatrics, Department of Health Sciences, A. Avogadro University Eastern Piedmont, Novara, Italy. 4. Unit of Neonatal Intensive Care, Maggiore della Carità Hospital, Novara, Italy - federica.ferrero@maggioreosp.novara.it.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To compare invasive (iNAVA) and non-invasive (nivNAVA) neurally adjusted ventilatory assist in infants, respect to gas exchange, breathing pattern, respiratory drive, infant-ventilator interaction and synchrony, vital parameters and required sedation. METHODS: Ten consecutive intubated term infants admitted for respiratory failure of different etiology underwent to 2-hour not-randomized trials of iNAVA and, after extubation, nivNAVA, the latter with unchanged ventilator settings and with air-leaks compensating software. Arterialized capillary blood was sampled at the end of each trial. We computed: 1) the minimum (EAdimin) and peak (EAdipeak) values of the diaphragm electrical activity; 2) ventilator (RRmec) and own patients' (RRneu) respiratory rates; 3) inspiratory (delayTR-insp) and expiratory trigger delays (delayTR-exp) and the time of synchrony between patient's effort and ventilator assistance (Timesynch/Tineu); 4) the asynchrony index. Vital parameters and required sedation were also recorded. RESULTS: iNAVA and nivNAVA did not differ between in terms of gas exchange (pH (7.35 [7.31-7.41] vs. 7.36 [7.30-7.40], P=0.745), PcCO2 (38.4 [34.8-42.6] vs. 36.9 [33.9-41.6] mmHg, P=0.469) and PcO2/FiO2 (211 [168-323] vs. 214 [189-282], P=0.195), respectively). EAdimin, EAdipeak, RRmec and RRneu were similar before and after extubation. Both modes confirmed an optimal infant-ventilator interaction (i.e. delayTR-insp, delayTR-exp and Timesynch/Tineu), irrespective of the interface, and no patients showed clinical relevant asynchronies. A low requirement of sedation with fentanyl was recorded during both trials, without differences between. CONCLUSIONS: We found iNAVA and nivNAVA to be characterized by similar gas exchange, breathing pattern, respiratory drive, infant-ventilator interaction and synchrony, vital parameters and required sedation.
BACKGROUND: To compare invasive (iNAVA) and non-invasive (nivNAVA) neurally adjusted ventilatory assist in infants, respect to gas exchange, breathing pattern, respiratory drive, infant-ventilator interaction and synchrony, vital parameters and required sedation. METHODS: Ten consecutive intubated term infants admitted for respiratory failure of different etiology underwent to 2-hour not-randomized trials of iNAVA and, after extubation, nivNAVA, the latter with unchanged ventilator settings and with air-leaks compensating software. Arterialized capillary blood was sampled at the end of each trial. We computed: 1) the minimum (EAdimin) and peak (EAdipeak) values of the diaphragm electrical activity; 2) ventilator (RRmec) and own patients' (RRneu) respiratory rates; 3) inspiratory (delayTR-insp) and expiratory trigger delays (delayTR-exp) and the time of synchrony between patient's effort and ventilator assistance (Timesynch/Tineu); 4) the asynchrony index. Vital parameters and required sedation were also recorded. RESULTS: iNAVA and nivNAVA did not differ between in terms of gas exchange (pH (7.35 [7.31-7.41] vs. 7.36 [7.30-7.40], P=0.745), PcCO2 (38.4 [34.8-42.6] vs. 36.9 [33.9-41.6] mmHg, P=0.469) and PcO2/FiO2 (211 [168-323] vs. 214 [189-282], P=0.195), respectively). EAdimin, EAdipeak, RRmec and RRneu were similar before and after extubation. Both modes confirmed an optimal infant-ventilator interaction (i.e. delayTR-insp, delayTR-exp and Timesynch/Tineu), irrespective of the interface, and no patients showed clinical relevant asynchronies. A low requirement of sedation with fentanyl was recorded during both trials, without differences between. CONCLUSIONS: We found iNAVA and nivNAVA to be characterized by similar gas exchange, breathing pattern, respiratory drive, infant-ventilator interaction and synchrony, vital parameters and required sedation.