Abstract
BACKGROUND: In patients with COPD exacerbation, noninvasive ventilation (NIV) is strongly recommended. NIV is generally delivered by using patient triggered and flow-cycled pressure support through a face mask. A specific method to generate neurally-controlled pressure support has been shown to improve comfort and patient-ventilator interaction. In addition, the helmet interface was better tolerated by patients compared with a face mask. Herein, we compared neurally-controlled pressure support through a helmet with pressure support through a face mask with respect to subject comfort, breathing pattern, gas exchange, pressurization and triggering performance, and patient-ventilator synchrony.
METHODS: Two 30-min trials of NIV were randomly delivered to 10 subjects with COPD exacerbation redundant: (1) pressure support through a face mask with inspiratory pressure support of ≥8 cm H2O to obtain a tidal volume of 6–8 mL/kg of ideal body weight; and (2) NAVA through a helmet, setting the neurally-adjusted ventilatory assist level at 15 cm H2O/μV, with an upper airway pressure limit to obtain the same overall airway pressure applied during pressure support through a face mask. We assessed subject comfort, breathing frequency, respiratory drive, arterial blood gases, pressure-time product (PTP) of the first 300 ms and 500ms after initiation of subject effort, inspiratory trigger delay, and rate of asynchrony determined as the asynchrony index.
RESULTS: Median and interquartile range NAVA through a helmet improved comfort (7.0 [6.0–8.0]) compared with pressure support through a face mask (5.0 [4.7–5.2], P = .005). The breathing pattern was not different between the methods. Respiratory drive was slightly, although not significantly, reduced (P = .19) during NAVA through a helmet in comparison with pressure support through a face mask. Gas exchange was also not different between the trials. The PTP of the first 300 ms (P = .92) and PTP of the first 500 ms (P = .08) were not statistically different between trials, whereas triggering performance, patient-ventilator interaction, and synchrony were all improved by NAVA through a helmet compared with pressure support through a face mask.
CONCLUSIONS: In the subjects with COPD with exacerbation, NAVA through a helmet improved comfort, triggering performance, and patient-ventilator synchrony compared with pressure support through a face mask.
- noninvasive ventilation
- mechanical ventilation
- pressure-support ventilation
- neurally adjusted ventilatory assist
- patient-ventilator interaction
- ventilator performance
- patient-ventilator asynchrony
Footnotes
- Correspondence: Federico Longhini MD, Intensive Care Unit, University Hospital Mater Domini, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Magna Graecia University Viale Europa, 88100, Catanzaro, Italy. E-mail: longhini.federico{at}gmail.com.
Drs Longhini and Liu are co-first authors.
The study was conducted in the Intensive Care Unit, Department of Critical Care Medicine, Zhongda Hospital, Southeast University, School of Medicine, Nanjing, China.
Dr Navalesi discloses relationships with Intersurgical S.p.A., Maquet Critical Care, Hillrom, Philips, Resmed, and Novartis. The remaining authors have disclosed no conflicts of interest.
- Copyright © 2019 by Daedalus Enterprises