Literature DB >> 9657583

Expiratory valves used for home devices: experimental and clinical comparison.

F Lofaso1, P Aslanian, J C Richard, D Isabey, T Hang, E Corriger, A Harf, L Brochard.   

Abstract

A bench study followed by a clinical trial were performed to evaluate the mechanical characteristics of five (commercially available) expiratory valves used for home ventilators, as well as the potential clinical impact of differences between these valves. In the in vitro study, expiratory valve resistance was evaluated under unvarying conditions, whereas dynamic behaviour was evaluated by calculating the imposed expiratory work of breathing during a simulated breath generated by a lung model. Differences in resistance and imposed expiratory work of up to twofold and 150%, respectively, were found across valves. We then conducted a randomized crossover clinical study to compare the effects of the least resistive (Bennett) and most resistive expiratory valves (Peters) in 10 intubated patients receiving pressure support ventilation. There were no significant differences regarding blood gases or respiratory parameters except for the oesophageal pressure-time product (PTPoes), which was significantly increased by the Peters valve (236+/-113 cmH2O x s x min(-1) versus 194+/-90 cmH2O x s x min(-1)). An analysis of individual responses found that the Peters valve induced substantial increases in intrinsic positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), PTPoes, and expiratory activity in those patients with the greatest ventilatory demand. In conclusion, differences between home expiratory valve resistances may have a clinically relevant impact on the respiratory effort of patients with a high ventilatory demand.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9657583     DOI: 10.1183/09031936.98.11061382

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Respir J        ISSN: 0903-1936            Impact factor:   16.671


  3 in total

1.  Bench studies evaluating devices for non-invasive ventilation: critical analysis and future perspectives.

Authors:  Carlo Olivieri; Roberta Costa; Giorgio Conti; Paolo Navalesi
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2011-11-29       Impact factor: 17.440

2.  Pressure support versus assisted controlled noninvasive ventilation in neuromuscular disease.

Authors:  Karim Chadda; Bernard Clair; David Orlikowski; Gilles Macadoux; Jean Claude Raphael; Frédéric Lofaso
Journal:  Neurocrit Care       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.210

3.  Effect of a passive exhalation port on tracheostomy ventilation in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis patients: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Andrea Vianello; Giovanna Arcaro; Beatrice Molena; Silvia Iovino; Federico Gallan; Cristian Turato; Rosario Marchese-Ragona
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 2.895

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.