Skip to main content
 

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Editor's Commentary
    • Coming Next Month
    • Archives
    • Most-Read Papers of 2021
  • Authors
    • Author Guidelines
    • Submit a Manuscript
  • Reviewers
    • Reviewer Information
    • Create Reviewer Account
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Original Research
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Reviews
    • Appreciation of Reviewers
  • CRCE
    • Through the Journal
    • JournalCasts
    • AARC University
    • PowerPoint Template
  • Open Forum
    • 2022 Call for Abstracts
    • 2021 Abstracts
    • Previous Open Forums
  • Podcast
    • English
    • Español
    • Portugûes
    • 国语
  • Videos
    • Video Abstracts
    • Author Interviews
    • Highlighted Articles
    • The Journal

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Association for Respiratory Care
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
American Association for Respiratory Care

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Editor's Commentary
    • Coming Next Month
    • Archives
    • Most-Read Papers of 2021
  • Authors
    • Author Guidelines
    • Submit a Manuscript
  • Reviewers
    • Reviewer Information
    • Create Reviewer Account
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Original Research
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Reviews
    • Appreciation of Reviewers
  • CRCE
    • Through the Journal
    • JournalCasts
    • AARC University
    • PowerPoint Template
  • Open Forum
    • 2022 Call for Abstracts
    • 2021 Abstracts
    • Previous Open Forums
  • Podcast
    • English
    • Español
    • Portugûes
    • 国语
  • Videos
    • Video Abstracts
    • Author Interviews
    • Highlighted Articles
    • The Journal
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • YouTube
Meeting ReportMechanical Ventilation – Part 2

Comparison of Oxygen Utilization on Portable Ventilators Using Internal vs External Oxygen Concentrators

Lance Pingul Pangilinan, Justin Scott Phillips, Edward Karim Saliba, Edna Lee Warnecke and Mark Satomi Siobal
Respiratory Care October 2019, 64 (Suppl 10) 3231296;
Lance Pingul Pangilinan
Respiratory Care Services, UCSF / ZSFG, San Francisco, California, United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Justin Scott Phillips
Respiratory Care Services, UCSF / ZSFG, San Francisco, California, United States
Respiratory Therapist Program, Ohlone College, Kensington, California, United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Edward Karim Saliba
Respiratory Therapist Program, Ohlone College, Kensington, California, United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Edna Lee Warnecke
Respiratory Therapist Program, Ohlone College, Kensington, California, United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mark Satomi Siobal
Respiratory Care, Skyline College, San Bruno, California, United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
Loading

Abstract

Background: The VOCSN (Ventec Life Systems, Bothell, WA) device integrates up to five therapies (ventilation, oxygen concentrator, cough assist, suction, and nebulization) and can operate using two low flow oxygen sources: internal concentrator or bleed-in from an external gas source. We evaluated the oxygen flow requirements using the VOCSN pulse dose internal concentrator (PDIC) vs the VOCSN and Trilogy 100 ventilator (Philips Respironics, Murrysville, PA) using an external oxygen concentrator (EC). We hypothesized the flow necessary to achieve a specified FIO2 would be lower when using the pulse dose internal concentrator. Methods: The VOCSN and Trilogy 100 were compared using passive and active circuits connected to a TTL test lung (Michigan Instruments, Grand Rapids, MI). Three simulated lung models using different TTL test lung parameters included: normal – Cst 60 mL/cm H2O and Raw 5 cm H2O/L/s, restrictive – Cst 30 mL/cm H2O and Raw 5 cm H2O/L/s, and obstructive – Cst 60 mL/cm H2O, Raw 20 cm H2O/L/s. Using pressure ventilation, the peak pressure and rise time were titrated to achieve VT of 500mL as measured by a Certifier FA Plus (TSI Inc, Shoreview MN). Additional settings include: 12 breaths/min, PEEP 5 cm H2O, and IT 1.0 second. VOCSN PDIC and a Millennium M10 (Respironics, Murrysville, PA) EC flow were adjusted to achieve a measured FIO2 of approximately 0.40. Flow from the EC was measured by the Certifier FA Plus and FIO2 was measured by the Handi + oxygen analyzer (Maxtec, Salt Lake City, UT) at the inlet of the test lung. At least three measurements were done for each ventilator, circuit type, lung model, and oxygen concentrator combination. Data for the three lung models were averaged for each test configuration and reported as the mean ± SD for each circuit type. Results: The oxygen flow in L/min required to maintain a FIO2 of 0.40 (mean ± SD) with passive and active circuits respectively was: VOCSN-PDIC 2.61 ± 0.02 and 2.68 ± 0.12, VOCSN-EC 3.05 ± 0.16 and 5.59 ± 0.36, Trilogy-EC 4.78 ± 0.70 and 8.28 ± 1.31. Measured VT and FIO2 for all lung models, test configurations, and circuit types averaged 502 ± 8 mL and 0.397 ± 0.006 respectively. Conclusions: Oxygen flow requirement was lowest with the VOCSN ventilator using pulse dose internal oxygen concentrator with both the passive and active circuits, and with VOCSN using an external oxygen concentrator with the passive circuit compared to the Trilogy 100 ventilator.

Figure
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Footnotes

  • Commercial Relationships: Mark Siobal: Aerogen, Aerogen Pharma

  • Support: We received disposable and non-disposable equipment (circuits, ventilators and a concentrator) as well as oxygen from Ventec Life Systems for the purposes of this study.

  • Copyright © 2019 by Daedalus Enterprises
Previous
Back to top

In this issue

Respiratory Care
Vol. 64, Issue Suppl 10
1 Oct 2019
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

 

Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Association for Respiratory Care.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Comparison of Oxygen Utilization on Portable Ventilators Using Internal vs External Oxygen Concentrators
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Association for Respiratory Care
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Association for Respiratory Care web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Comparison of Oxygen Utilization on Portable Ventilators Using Internal vs External Oxygen Concentrators
Lance Pingul Pangilinan, Justin Scott Phillips, Edward Karim Saliba, Edna Lee Warnecke, Mark Satomi Siobal
Respiratory Care Oct 2019, 64 (Suppl 10) 3231296;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Comparison of Oxygen Utilization on Portable Ventilators Using Internal vs External Oxygen Concentrators
Lance Pingul Pangilinan, Justin Scott Phillips, Edward Karim Saliba, Edna Lee Warnecke, Mark Satomi Siobal
Respiratory Care Oct 2019, 64 (Suppl 10) 3231296;
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References

Related Articles

Cited By...

Info For

  • Subscribers
  • Institutions
  • Advertisers

About Us

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Reprints/Permissions

AARC

  • Membership
  • Meetings
  • Clinical Practice Guidelines

More

  • Contact Us
  • RSS
American Association for Respiratory Care

Print ISSN: 0020-1324        Online ISSN: 1943-3654

© Daedalus Enterprises, Inc.

Powered by HighWire