Optimizing Flow-Controlled Ventilation: Impact of I:E Ratios and Oxygen Concentration in a Porcine Model of Total Airway Obstruction.

Tomas Karlsson,Jenny Gustavsson,Katrin Wellfelt,Mattias Günther
{"title":"Optimizing Flow-Controlled Ventilation: Impact of I:E Ratios and Oxygen Concentration in a Porcine Model of Total Airway Obstruction.","authors":"Tomas Karlsson,Jenny Gustavsson,Katrin Wellfelt,Mattias Günther","doi":"10.1213/ane.0000000000007583","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\r\nPrehospital airway obstruction is a medical emergency requiring immediate intervention. When the insertion of a larger bore tube over an airway catheter is hindered by obstruction, flow-controlled ventilation (FCV) with expiratory ventilation assistance (EVA) may offer a solution by allowing for ventilation through the airway catheter. This method uses a continuous bidirectional flow, necessitating a high-pressure gas source, typically 100% oxygen. However, in prehospital or military settings, oxygen supplies and exact manual control may be limited. Therefore, evaluating FCV/EVA without 100% oxygen, and with variable inspiratory-to-expiratory (I:E) control is essential to ensure its feasibility in such environments. We hypothesized that arterial oxygenation with 21% oxygen would be feasible and would vary between different I:E ratios.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nIn this randomized crossover trial, FCV/EVA with different I:E ratios and fraction of inspired oxygen were compared in total airway obstruction. 15 crossbred male specific pathogen-free swine, mean (standard deviation [SD]) weight 56.6 (2.1) kg were divided into groups; method A (n = 9) and method B (n = 6), anesthetized, muscle relaxed and desaturated <80%. FCV/EVA was performed for 15 minutes through an airway catheter in the obstructed airway.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nIn I:E 1:1 vs 1:2 with 21% oxygen, the mean difference of Sao2 was 33.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.3-51.4, P =.0020) and Pao2 was 4.7 kPa (95% CI, 1.3-8.1, P =.0127). Paco2 decreased more in 1:1 than 1:1 with a pause and 1:2. Paco2 remained <5 kPa with small variability in 1:1 with 21% oxygen.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nFCV/EVA with 21% oxygen was feasible and maintained oxygenation and ventilation for 15 minutes. An I:E ratio of 1:1 was superior to 1:2. This approach may offer a viable alternative in a totally obstructed airway in resource-limited settings where higher oxygen concentrations are unavailable.","PeriodicalId":7799,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesia & Analgesia","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anesthesia & Analgesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0000000000007583","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND Prehospital airway obstruction is a medical emergency requiring immediate intervention. When the insertion of a larger bore tube over an airway catheter is hindered by obstruction, flow-controlled ventilation (FCV) with expiratory ventilation assistance (EVA) may offer a solution by allowing for ventilation through the airway catheter. This method uses a continuous bidirectional flow, necessitating a high-pressure gas source, typically 100% oxygen. However, in prehospital or military settings, oxygen supplies and exact manual control may be limited. Therefore, evaluating FCV/EVA without 100% oxygen, and with variable inspiratory-to-expiratory (I:E) control is essential to ensure its feasibility in such environments. We hypothesized that arterial oxygenation with 21% oxygen would be feasible and would vary between different I:E ratios. METHODS In this randomized crossover trial, FCV/EVA with different I:E ratios and fraction of inspired oxygen were compared in total airway obstruction. 15 crossbred male specific pathogen-free swine, mean (standard deviation [SD]) weight 56.6 (2.1) kg were divided into groups; method A (n = 9) and method B (n = 6), anesthetized, muscle relaxed and desaturated <80%. FCV/EVA was performed for 15 minutes through an airway catheter in the obstructed airway. RESULTS In I:E 1:1 vs 1:2 with 21% oxygen, the mean difference of Sao2 was 33.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.3-51.4, P =.0020) and Pao2 was 4.7 kPa (95% CI, 1.3-8.1, P =.0127). Paco2 decreased more in 1:1 than 1:1 with a pause and 1:2. Paco2 remained <5 kPa with small variability in 1:1 with 21% oxygen. CONCLUSIONS FCV/EVA with 21% oxygen was feasible and maintained oxygenation and ventilation for 15 minutes. An I:E ratio of 1:1 was superior to 1:2. This approach may offer a viable alternative in a totally obstructed airway in resource-limited settings where higher oxygen concentrations are unavailable.
优化流量控制通气:I:E比和氧浓度对猪全气道阻塞模型的影响。
院前气道阻塞是一种需要立即干预的医疗紧急情况。当在气道导管上插入较大的内径管因阻塞而受阻时,流量控制通气(FCV)结合呼气通气辅助(EVA)可以通过气道导管进行通气,从而提供一种解决方案。该方法使用连续的双向流动,需要高压气源,通常为100%氧气。然而,在院前或军事环境中,氧气供应和精确的手动控制可能有限。因此,在无100%氧气和可变吸气呼气(I:E)控制下评估FCV/EVA对于确保其在这种环境下的可行性至关重要。我们假设21%氧的动脉氧合是可行的,并且在不同的I:E比之间会有所不同。方法在本随机交叉试验中,比较不同I:E比和吸入氧分数的FCV/EVA对全气道阻塞的影响。选择15头平均(标准差[SD])体重56.6 (2.1)kg的杂交雄性特异性无病原体猪,随机分组;方法A (n = 9)和方法B (n = 6)麻醉,肌肉松弛,去饱和度<80%。FCV/EVA通过气道导管在阻塞的气道内进行15分钟。结果在1:E 1:1 vs 1:2含氧量21%时,Sao2平均差值为33.8%(95%可信区间[CI], 16.3 ~ 51.4, P = 0.0020), Pao2平均差值为4.7 kPa (95% CI, 1.3 ~ 8.1, P = 0.0127)。Paco2在1:1时比1:1和1:2时减少得更多。当含氧量为21%时,Paco2仍< 5kpa,且变化较小。结论21%氧的sfcv /EVA是可行的,维持氧合通气15分钟。I:E比为1:1优于1:2。在资源有限的情况下,这种方法可能为完全阻塞的气道提供一种可行的替代方法,因为无法获得更高的氧气浓度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信