TY - JOUR
T1 - Differential Ventilation Using Flow Control Valves as a Potential Bridge to Full Ventilatory Support during the COVID-19 Crisis From Bench to Bedside
AU - the Mount Sinai HELPS Innovate Group
AU - Levin, Matthew A.
AU - Shah, Anjan
AU - Shah, Ronak
AU - Kane, Erica
AU - Zhou, George
AU - Eisenkraft, James B.
AU - Chen, Martin D.
AU - Katz, Daniel
AU - Park, Chang
AU - Lai, Cheuk Yin
AU - Burnett, Garrett
AU - Gidicsin, Christopher
AU - Madek, Jonathan
AU - Uysal, Suzan
AU - Kohli-Seth, Roopa
AU - Leibowitz, Andrew B.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved.
PY - 2020/10/1
Y1 - 2020/10/1
N2 - Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, ventilator sharing was suggested to increase availability of mechanical ventilation. The safety and feasibility of ventilator sharing is unknown. Methods: A single ventilator in pressure control mode was used with flow control valves to simultaneously ventilate two patients with different lung compliances. The system was first evaluated using high-fidelity human patient simulator mannequins and then tested for 1 h in two pairs of COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure. Patients were matched on positive end-expiratory pressure, fractional inspired oxygen tension, and respiratory rate. Tidal volume and peak airway pressure (PMAX) were recorded from each patient using separate independent spirometers and arterial blood gas samples drawn at 0, 30, and 60 min. The authors assessed acid-base status, oxygenation, tidal volume, and PMAX for each patient. Stability was assessed by calculating the coefficient of variation. results: The valves performed as expected in simulation, providing a stable tidal volume of 400 ml each to two mannequins with compliance ratios varying from 20:20 to 20:90 ml/cm H2O. The system was then tested in two pairs of patients. Pair 1 was a 49-yr-old woman, ideal body weight 46 kg, and a 55-yr-old man, ideal body weight 64 kg, with lung compliance 27 ml/cm H2O versus 35 ml/cm H2O. The coefficient of variation for tidal volume was 0.2 to 1.7%, and for PMAX 0 to 1.1%. Pair 2 was a 32-yr-old man, ideal body weight 62 kg, and a 56-yr-old woman, ideal body weight 46 kg, with lung compliance 12 ml/cm H2O versus 21 ml/cm H2O. The coefficient of variation for tidal volume was 0.4 to 5.6%, and for PMAX 0 to 2.1%. Conclusions: Differential ventilation using a single ventilator is feasible. Flow control valves enable delivery of stable tidal volume and PMAX similar to those provided by individual ventilators.
AB - Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, ventilator sharing was suggested to increase availability of mechanical ventilation. The safety and feasibility of ventilator sharing is unknown. Methods: A single ventilator in pressure control mode was used with flow control valves to simultaneously ventilate two patients with different lung compliances. The system was first evaluated using high-fidelity human patient simulator mannequins and then tested for 1 h in two pairs of COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure. Patients were matched on positive end-expiratory pressure, fractional inspired oxygen tension, and respiratory rate. Tidal volume and peak airway pressure (PMAX) were recorded from each patient using separate independent spirometers and arterial blood gas samples drawn at 0, 30, and 60 min. The authors assessed acid-base status, oxygenation, tidal volume, and PMAX for each patient. Stability was assessed by calculating the coefficient of variation. results: The valves performed as expected in simulation, providing a stable tidal volume of 400 ml each to two mannequins with compliance ratios varying from 20:20 to 20:90 ml/cm H2O. The system was then tested in two pairs of patients. Pair 1 was a 49-yr-old woman, ideal body weight 46 kg, and a 55-yr-old man, ideal body weight 64 kg, with lung compliance 27 ml/cm H2O versus 35 ml/cm H2O. The coefficient of variation for tidal volume was 0.2 to 1.7%, and for PMAX 0 to 1.1%. Pair 2 was a 32-yr-old man, ideal body weight 62 kg, and a 56-yr-old woman, ideal body weight 46 kg, with lung compliance 12 ml/cm H2O versus 21 ml/cm H2O. The coefficient of variation for tidal volume was 0.4 to 5.6%, and for PMAX 0 to 2.1%. Conclusions: Differential ventilation using a single ventilator is feasible. Flow control valves enable delivery of stable tidal volume and PMAX similar to those provided by individual ventilators.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85091126646&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/ALN.0000000000003473
DO - 10.1097/ALN.0000000000003473
M3 - Article
C2 - 32639236
AN - SCOPUS:85091126646
SN - 0003-3022
VL - 133
SP - 892
EP - 904
JO - Anesthesiology
JF - Anesthesiology
IS - 4
ER -