Literature DB >> 32448344

Effect of flow and cannula size on generated pressure during nasal high flow.

Maximilian Pinkham1, Stanislav Tatkov2.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Keywords:  Acute respiratory failure; COVID-19; Nasal cannula; Nasal high flow; Positive airway pressure

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32448344      PMCID: PMC7245881          DOI: 10.1186/s13054-020-02980-w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care        ISSN: 1364-8535            Impact factor:   9.097


× No keyword cloud information.

Introduction

Nasal high flow (NHF) with supplemental oxygen has been proposed to treat COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF) [1]. NHF gained its popularity due to the high oxygenation efficiency and success in treating patients with hypoxemic ARF [2]. Apart from the delivery of oxygen, NHF reduces the rebreathing from anatomical dead space and generates positive airway pressure; however, the delivered pressure is difficult to quantify due to the unsealed cannula interface. The purpose of this research is to provide clinicians with the indicative data of the generated pressure using different flow settings and cannula sizes.

Methods

A chamber with two adjacent orifices to fit the cannula served as a model of the nasal cavity with nares, which has been described in detail previously [3]. Briefly, two “nare” sizes of 9-mm and 10-mm diameter were included to replicate similar pressures observed previously in patients [4]. NHF was delivered via a smaller-sized cannula, O.D. 6.1 mm/I.D. 5.1 mm, and a larger-sized cannula, O.D. 7.2 mm/I.D. 6.0 mm (Optiflow™ OPT944 “Medium” and OPT946 “Large”, Fisher & Paykel Healthcare, NZ). Measurements were made during the static condition to replicate pressure at the end of expiration in a mouth-closed position.

Results

As shown in Fig. 1, NHF generates greater pressure when delivered using a larger cannula and with higher flow rate. For example, NHF of 60 L/min generated pressure of 12.1 cmH2O using the larger cannula compared to 4.8 cmH2O using the smaller cannula, in the 9-mm diameter “nare”. The same cannula size will generate greater pressure when used in a smaller nare. Therefore, using higher flow rates as well as increasing the prong/nare area ratio will generate greater positive airway pressure.
Fig. 1

The graph shows the positive airway pressure, cmH2O, that is generated by nasal high flow (NHF) using a smaller cannula (O.D. 6.1 mm) and larger cannula (O.D. 7.2 mm) in “nares” with two different diameters: 10 mm (left panel) and 9 mm (right panel) in the bench top model. Pressure generated by NHF can be increased by higher flow and by occluding a larger area of the nare, which can be achieved by increasing the cannula size

The graph shows the positive airway pressure, cmH2O, that is generated by nasal high flow (NHF) using a smaller cannula (O.D. 6.1 mm) and larger cannula (O.D. 7.2 mm) in “nares” with two different diameters: 10 mm (left panel) and 9 mm (right panel) in the bench top model. Pressure generated by NHF can be increased by higher flow and by occluding a larger area of the nare, which can be achieved by increasing the cannula size

Discussion

The data show that in order to deliver higher pressure during NHF, then the flow rate and/or cannula size need to be increased. The results are taken from a bench experiment with inelastic orifices, and patients rarely have a closed system; however, the bench data demonstrate that a small reduction of the leak around the cannula, by occluding a larger area of the nare, may lead to a substantial increase of delivered pressure, particularly in the upper range of NHF rates. The relationship between the occlusion and flow rate in generating positive airway pressure is non-linear; as the occlusion is increased, then pressure will increase significantly due to the increased resistance to flow leaving the nare [3]. Using a very small internal diameter of cannula may also affect relationship between flow and pressure through the jetting effect; however, this was outside the scope of the study [5]. The increase of pressure may reduce comfort and encourage a patient to open their mouth, which may lead to an increase of leak and reduction of pressure [4]; there is no data on the clinical effects of opening the mouth in patients with ARF. Also, the opening of the mouth may enhance the dead space clearance [6]. Larger-sized cannula may potentially reduce the clearance due to the lower leak if the mouth is not opened. However, at the highest flow rate, the dead space clearance is likely to be maximized regardless of the cannula size. Therefore, at 60 L/min, which is 1000 mL/s, the nasal cavity will be filled with fresh gas within a fraction of a second leading to rapid dilution and purging of the expired air. The experimental data demonstrates the rise in pressure with the increase of the cannula size and flow rate. The findings can be of practical value in the management of patients with severe ARF who need higher levels of positive airway pressure.
  6 in total

1.  The effects of flow on airway pressure during nasal high-flow oxygen therapy.

Authors:  Rachael L Parke; Michelle L Eccleston; Shay P McGuinness
Journal:  Respir Care       Date:  2011-04-15       Impact factor: 2.258

2.  Management of Critically Ill Adults With COVID-19.

Authors:  Jason T Poston; Bhakti K Patel; Andrew M Davis
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2020-03-26       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Correlation of high flow nasal cannula outlet area with gas clearance and pressure in adult upper airway replicas.

Authors:  Charles P Moore; Ira M Katz; Georges Caillibotte; Warren H Finlay; Andrew R Martin
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2017-11-11       Impact factor: 2.063

4.  High-flow oxygen through nasal cannula in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.

Authors:  Jean-Pierre Frat; Arnaud W Thille; Alain Mercat; Christophe Girault; Stéphanie Ragot; Sébastien Perbet; Gwénael Prat; Thierry Boulain; Elise Morawiec; Alice Cottereau; Jérôme Devaquet; Saad Nseir; Keyvan Razazi; Jean-Paul Mira; Laurent Argaud; Jean-Charles Chakarian; Jean-Damien Ricard; Xavier Wittebole; Stéphanie Chevalier; Alexandre Herbland; Muriel Fartoukh; Jean-Michel Constantin; Jean-Marie Tonnelier; Marc Pierrot; Armelle Mathonnet; Gaëtan Béduneau; Céline Delétage-Métreau; Jean-Christophe M Richard; Laurent Brochard; René Robert
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2015-05-17       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Effectiveness of nasal highflow in hypercapnic COPD patients is flow and leakage dependent.

Authors:  Jens Bräunlich; Friederike Mauersberger; Hubert Wirtz
Journal:  BMC Pulm Med       Date:  2018-01-24       Impact factor: 3.317

6.  Mechanisms of nasal high flow therapy in newborns.

Authors:  Pavel Mazmanyan; Mari Darakchyan; Maximilian I Pinkham; Stanislav Tatkov
Journal:  J Appl Physiol (1985)       Date:  2020-02-20
  6 in total
  4 in total

Review 1.  The clinical advantage of nasal high-flow in respiratory management during procedural sedation: A scoping review on the application of nasal high-flow during dental procedures with sedation.

Authors:  Shinji Kurata; Takuro Sanuki; Hitoshi Higuchi; Takuya Miyawaki; Seiji Watanabe; Shigeru Maeda; Shuntaro Sato; Max Pinkham; Stanislav Tatkov; Takao Ayuse
Journal:  Jpn Dent Sci Rev       Date:  2022-06-04

2.  Comparison of airway pressures and expired gas washout for nasal high flow versus CPAP in child airway replicas.

Authors:  Kelvin Duong; Michelle Noga; Joanna E MacLean; Warren H Finlay; Andrew R Martin
Journal:  Respir Res       Date:  2021-11-10

3.  Effect of respiratory rate and size of cannula on pressure and dead-space clearance during nasal high flow in patients with COPD and acute respiratory failure.

Authors:  Maximilian I Pinkham; Ulrike Domanski; Karl-Josef Franke; Justus Hartmann; Maik Schroeder; Tony Williams; Georg Nilius; Stanislav Tatkov
Journal:  J Appl Physiol (1985)       Date:  2022-01-27

4.  Nasal High Flow at 25 L/min or Expiratory Resistive Load Do Not Improve Regional Lung Function in Patients With COPD: A Functional CT Imaging Study.

Authors:  Julien G Cohen; Ludovic Broche; Mohammed Machichi; Gilbert R Ferretti; Renaud Tamisier; Jean-Louis Pépin; Sam Bayat
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2021-06-10       Impact factor: 4.566

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.