| Literature DB >> 35859660 |
Mauricio Orozco-Levi1,2,3, Carlos Reyes4, Neikel Quintero1, Diana Tiga-Loza1,2,3, Mabel Reyes1,2,3, Sandra Sanabria5, Camilo Pizarro4, Juan De Hoyos5, Norma Serrano6, Victor Castillo5,7, Alba Ramírez-Sarmiento1,2,3,6.
Abstract
Introduction: Tracheostomy is one of the most common surgical strategies in intensive care units (ICU) and provides relevant clinical benefit for multiple indications. However, the complications associated with its use range from 5 to 40% according to different series. The risk of these complications could be reduced if fixation strategies and alignment of the tracheostomy tube with respect to the tracheal axis are improved. Aim: To build a functional device of technological innovation in respiratory medicine for the fixation and alignment of tracheostomy cannula (acronym DYNAtraq) and to evaluate its feasibility and safety in a pilot study in mechanically ventilated patients.Entities:
Keywords: DYNAtraq; alignment; mechanical ventilation; tracheostomy; tubes
Year: 2022 PMID: 35859660 PMCID: PMC9289456 DOI: 10.2147/MDER.S366829
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Med Devices (Auckl) ISSN: 1179-1470
General Characteristics of the Study Population
| 7 (100%) | ||
| Median (SD) | 54 (15) | |
| Males, n (%) | 6 (85.7) | |
| Median (SD) | 30.3 (5.8) | |
| Yes n (%) | 6 (85.7) | |
| Days, median (min-max) | 21 (11–89) | |
| Days, median (min-max) | 22 (9–71) | |
| Days, median (min-max) | 13 (6–50) | |
| Days, median (min-max) | 10.9 (1–45) | |
| Lateral-lateral deviation of the tracheal axis | Degrees, median (min-max) | 13 (6–50) |
| Cephalocaudal deviation of the tracheal axis | Degrees, median (min-max) | 17 (5.1–37.1) |
| Lateral-lateral deviation of the tracheal axis | Degrees, median (min-max) | 2.4 (0.4–7) |
| Cephalocaudal deviation of the tracheal axis | Degrees, median (min-max) | 5.6 (1.9–9.6) |
| Excoriation /laceration, n (%) | 0 | |
| Flictena, n (%) | 0 | |
| Erithema, n (%) | 0 | |
| Pressure Ulcer, n (%) | 0 | |
| Deformation, n (%) | 1 (14.3) | |
| Failure in adherence to skin, n (%) | 4 (57.1) | |
| Fracture, n (%) | 0 |
Notes: General descriptive variables of patients included in the pilot study to evaluate the DYNAtraq device in patients in intensive care unit. Safety variables of the device is also described.
Figure 1(A) Representative figure of the industrial design drawings of DYNAtraq device. The intention of taking the DYNAtraq device to the molding, injection, clinical validation and future commercialization process has required all the necessary plans being designed in accordance with current regulations. These design drawings were also necessary to file the patent application. For more details on the respective plans, please contact the principal investigator. (B) Three-dimensional space graphic design of DYNAtraq device.
Figure 2Specialized 3D graphic design of the end of the DYNAtraq device. (A) Frontal plane view; (B and C) obliquus plane view; (D) sagittal plane view; (E) axial plane view.
Figure 3Conceptual model of DYNAtraq device evaluated in life-size human manikins. (A) Frontal plane view; (B) and (C) oblicuous plane view.
Figure 4Cytotoxicity tests. The cytotoxicity test was carried out following the international standard ISO 10993–5. The extraction process was carried out according to ISO 10993–12. Different concentrations of the extract (100%, 75%, 50%, 25% and 12.5%) were exposed to the L929 cell line for 24 hours. Bars represent mean (SD) of the viability obtained in triplicate experiments.
Figure 5Tensile loads tolerated by the connectors before disconnection from the tracheostomy tube. Under experimental laboratory conditions, high values (several KgF) were recorded for both the DYNAtraq 15mm connector and the reference connector before they were disconnected from the tracheostomy tube. Bars represent the mean (SD) value of the studies performed in triplicate for both connectors.
Figure 6Comparisons Between Sequential Photographs Taken Prior To And After The Placement Of The DYNAtraq Device In Ventilated Patients. Sequential pictures from three selected patients to show cephalo-caudal view of intrasubject comparisons prior to and after the placement of the DYNAtraq device. Pictures (A, C and E) represent the referent caudal-cephalic photographs patients without the device, whereas pictures (B, D and F) show caudal-cephalic photographs of the same patient once the device has been placed on the chest taking the midline of the sternum for reference. Color code: (Yellow arrows): axis of the tracheostomy tube alignment at baseline (without the device) position; (Red arrows): axis of the tracheostomy tubes using the DYNAtraq device. It is also shown in (E and F) pictures the degree of lateral misalignment in a patient in the face of equivalent left to right push loading on the tracheostomy tube. Note that the device offers greater tolerance to the pushing load as it is deduced from a lower angular displacement despite of an equivalent external load.
Figure 7Patient With DYNAtraq Dispositive: Lateral View In Supine Position Comparisons Between Sequential Photographs Taken Prior To And After The Placement Of The DYNAtraq Device In Ventilated PatientS. Sequential pictures from three selected patients to show latero-lateral view of intrasubject comparisons prior to and after the placement of the DYNAtraq device. Pictures (A, C and E) represent the referent latero-lateral photograph of the patients without the device, whereas pictures (B, D and F) show latero-lateral photographs of the same patient once the device has been placed on the chest following the interclavicular line reference. Color code: (Yellow arrows): axis of the tracheostomy tube alignment at baseline (without the device) position; (Red arrows): axis of the tracheostomy tubes using the DYNAtraq device.
Perception of Use of the DYNAtraq Device in Health Workers of the ICU
| Scale | Strongly Agree | Agree | Undecided | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | Total Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Domains | n (%) | n (%) | n (%) | n (%) | n (%) | Median (SD) |
| 36 (50.7) | 34 (47.9) | 1 (1.4) | 0 | 0 | 4.49 (0.53) | |
| 32 (45.1) | 31 (43.7) | 8 (11.3) | 0 | 0 | 4.33 (0.67) | |
| 27 (30) | 31 (43.7) | 13 (18.3) | 0 | 0 | 4.19 (0.73) | |
| 29 (40.8) | 38 (53.5) | 1 (1.4) | 3 (4.4) | 0 | 4.31 (0.71) | |
| 26 (36.6) | 33 (46.5) | 5 (7) | 7 (9.9) | 0 | 4.10 (0.91) | |
| 23 (32.4) | 30 (42.3) | 17 (23.9) | 1 (1.4) | 0 | 4.06 (0.79) | |
| 34 (47.9) | 25 (35.2) | 12 (16.9) | 0 | 0 | 4.31 (0.75) | |
| 29 (40.8) | 30 (42.3) | 7 (9.9) | 4 (5.6) | 1 (1.4) | 4.14 (0.98) |
Note: Median (SD) values of sexagesimal scale evaluating the perceptual characteristics including safety variables of the device reported by tens of ICU health workers.