6台无创家用呼吸机的台架评价:与ICU呼吸机和无监督聚类的比较。

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
Joris Pensier, Mathieu Capdevila, Dany Jaffuel, Abdelkebir Sabil, Fabrice Galia, Albert Prades, Aurélie Vonarb, Julien Boudjemaa, Audrey De Jong, Samir Jaber
{"title":"6台无创家用呼吸机的台架评价:与ICU呼吸机和无监督聚类的比较。","authors":"Joris Pensier, Mathieu Capdevila, Dany Jaffuel, Abdelkebir Sabil, Fabrice Galia, Albert Prades, Aurélie Vonarb, Julien Boudjemaa, Audrey De Jong, Samir Jaber","doi":"10.1136/bmjresp-2025-003532","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure often necessitates non-invasive ventilation (NIV) at home. Our study aimed to assess the static and dynamic performance of six modern NIV home ventilators and one intensive care unit (ICU) ventilator and to identify performance clusters among the devices.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A two-compartment lung model was connected to seven NIV ventilators (Sefam Stan, Philips A40, Philips DreamStation, Resmed Lumis 150, Löwenstein PrismaVent 30C, Löwenstein PrismaVent 40 and BellaVista 1000) in pressure-support mode. Static and dynamic (triggering and pressurisation) performances were assessed through three distinct clinical phenotypes and four levels of unintentional leak. Clustering analysis was performed using K-means.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For each of the seven ventilators, 144 conditions were tested, and a total of 3024 cycles were analysed. Static and dynamic performances were good to excellent across home ventilators, significantly higher than the ICU ventilator. Clustering analysis identified three performance clusters. Cluster 1 (Sefam Stan and Philips A40) showed significantly more precise accuracy of inspiratory pressure than Cluster 2 (Philips DreamStation, Resmed Lumis 150, Löwenstein PrismaVent 30C and Löwenstein PrismaVent 40) and Cluster 3 (BellaVista 1000): mean error=4.3%±5.1% versus 8.5%±6.7% versus 10.6%±14.7% respectively, p<0.001. For the triggering delay, Cluster 1 displayed shorter delays than Cluster 2 and Cluster 3 (41±5 ms vs 58±11 ms vs 67±13 ms, respectively, p<0.001). For the pressurisation delay, Cluster 1 displayed shorter delays than Cluster 2 and Cluster 3 (42±6 ms vs 64±14 ms vs 87±14 ms, respectively, p<0.001). For the pressure-time product at 300 ms, Cluster 1 displayed higher area under the curve for the first 300 ms than Cluster 2 and Cluster 3 (2.1±1.1 cmH<sub>2</sub>O /s vs 1.6±0.8 cmH<sub>2</sub>O/s vs 1.3±1.0 cmH<sub>2</sub>O/s, respectively, p<0.001). Continuous unintentional leaks did not modify the pressurisation performances in Cluster 1 but altered them in Clusters 2 and 3.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The six NIV home ventilators demonstrated superior performance compared with the tested ICU ventilator. The ventilators of Cluster 1 were identified as top performers in clustering analysis and compensated for unintentional continuous leaks.</p>","PeriodicalId":9048,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Respiratory Research","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bench evaluation of six non-invasive ventilation home ventilators: comparison with an ICU ventilator and unsupervised clustering.\",\"authors\":\"Joris Pensier, Mathieu Capdevila, Dany Jaffuel, Abdelkebir Sabil, Fabrice Galia, Albert Prades, Aurélie Vonarb, Julien Boudjemaa, Audrey De Jong, Samir Jaber\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjresp-2025-003532\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure often necessitates non-invasive ventilation (NIV) at home. Our study aimed to assess the static and dynamic performance of six modern NIV home ventilators and one intensive care unit (ICU) ventilator and to identify performance clusters among the devices.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A two-compartment lung model was connected to seven NIV ventilators (Sefam Stan, Philips A40, Philips DreamStation, Resmed Lumis 150, Löwenstein PrismaVent 30C, Löwenstein PrismaVent 40 and BellaVista 1000) in pressure-support mode. Static and dynamic (triggering and pressurisation) performances were assessed through three distinct clinical phenotypes and four levels of unintentional leak. Clustering analysis was performed using K-means.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For each of the seven ventilators, 144 conditions were tested, and a total of 3024 cycles were analysed. Static and dynamic performances were good to excellent across home ventilators, significantly higher than the ICU ventilator. Clustering analysis identified three performance clusters. Cluster 1 (Sefam Stan and Philips A40) showed significantly more precise accuracy of inspiratory pressure than Cluster 2 (Philips DreamStation, Resmed Lumis 150, Löwenstein PrismaVent 30C and Löwenstein PrismaVent 40) and Cluster 3 (BellaVista 1000): mean error=4.3%±5.1% versus 8.5%±6.7% versus 10.6%±14.7% respectively, p<0.001. For the triggering delay, Cluster 1 displayed shorter delays than Cluster 2 and Cluster 3 (41±5 ms vs 58±11 ms vs 67±13 ms, respectively, p<0.001). For the pressurisation delay, Cluster 1 displayed shorter delays than Cluster 2 and Cluster 3 (42±6 ms vs 64±14 ms vs 87±14 ms, respectively, p<0.001). For the pressure-time product at 300 ms, Cluster 1 displayed higher area under the curve for the first 300 ms than Cluster 2 and Cluster 3 (2.1±1.1 cmH<sub>2</sub>O /s vs 1.6±0.8 cmH<sub>2</sub>O/s vs 1.3±1.0 cmH<sub>2</sub>O/s, respectively, p<0.001). Continuous unintentional leaks did not modify the pressurisation performances in Cluster 1 but altered them in Clusters 2 and 3.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The six NIV home ventilators demonstrated superior performance compared with the tested ICU ventilator. The ventilators of Cluster 1 were identified as top performers in clustering analysis and compensated for unintentional continuous leaks.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9048,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Open Respiratory Research\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Open Respiratory Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjresp-2025-003532\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Respiratory Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjresp-2025-003532","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

慢性高碳酸血症性呼吸衰竭通常需要在家中进行无创通气(NIV)。我们的研究旨在评估6台现代NIV家用呼吸机和1台重症监护病房(ICU)呼吸机的静态和动态性能,并确定设备之间的性能集群。方法:双室肺模型在压力支持模式下连接7台NIV呼吸机(sesam Stan、Philips A40、Philips DreamStation、Resmed Lumis 150、Löwenstein PrismaVent 30C、Löwenstein PrismaVent 40和BellaVista 1000)。静态和动态(触发和加压)性能通过三种不同的临床表型和四个级别的无意泄漏进行评估。采用K-means进行聚类分析。结果:7台呼吸机各检测144个工况,共分析3024个循环。家用呼吸机的静态和动态性能均为良好至优异,显著高于ICU呼吸机。聚类分析确定了三个性能集群。第1组(semam Stan和Philips A40)吸气压力的准确性明显高于第2组(Philips DreamStation、Resmed Lumis 150、Löwenstein PrismaVent 30C和Löwenstein PrismaVent 40)和第3组(BellaVista 1000):平均误差分别为4.3%±5.1%和8.5%±6.7%和10.6%±14.7%,p2O /s比1.6±0.8 cmH2O/s比1.3±1.0 cmH2O/s。结论:6台NIV家用呼吸机与ICU呼吸机相比,表现出更优越的性能。在聚类分析中,集群1的呼吸机被认为是表现最好的,并对无意的连续泄漏进行了补偿。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Bench evaluation of six non-invasive ventilation home ventilators: comparison with an ICU ventilator and unsupervised clustering.

Introduction: Chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure often necessitates non-invasive ventilation (NIV) at home. Our study aimed to assess the static and dynamic performance of six modern NIV home ventilators and one intensive care unit (ICU) ventilator and to identify performance clusters among the devices.

Methods: A two-compartment lung model was connected to seven NIV ventilators (Sefam Stan, Philips A40, Philips DreamStation, Resmed Lumis 150, Löwenstein PrismaVent 30C, Löwenstein PrismaVent 40 and BellaVista 1000) in pressure-support mode. Static and dynamic (triggering and pressurisation) performances were assessed through three distinct clinical phenotypes and four levels of unintentional leak. Clustering analysis was performed using K-means.

Results: For each of the seven ventilators, 144 conditions were tested, and a total of 3024 cycles were analysed. Static and dynamic performances were good to excellent across home ventilators, significantly higher than the ICU ventilator. Clustering analysis identified three performance clusters. Cluster 1 (Sefam Stan and Philips A40) showed significantly more precise accuracy of inspiratory pressure than Cluster 2 (Philips DreamStation, Resmed Lumis 150, Löwenstein PrismaVent 30C and Löwenstein PrismaVent 40) and Cluster 3 (BellaVista 1000): mean error=4.3%±5.1% versus 8.5%±6.7% versus 10.6%±14.7% respectively, p<0.001. For the triggering delay, Cluster 1 displayed shorter delays than Cluster 2 and Cluster 3 (41±5 ms vs 58±11 ms vs 67±13 ms, respectively, p<0.001). For the pressurisation delay, Cluster 1 displayed shorter delays than Cluster 2 and Cluster 3 (42±6 ms vs 64±14 ms vs 87±14 ms, respectively, p<0.001). For the pressure-time product at 300 ms, Cluster 1 displayed higher area under the curve for the first 300 ms than Cluster 2 and Cluster 3 (2.1±1.1 cmH2O /s vs 1.6±0.8 cmH2O/s vs 1.3±1.0 cmH2O/s, respectively, p<0.001). Continuous unintentional leaks did not modify the pressurisation performances in Cluster 1 but altered them in Clusters 2 and 3.

Conclusion: The six NIV home ventilators demonstrated superior performance compared with the tested ICU ventilator. The ventilators of Cluster 1 were identified as top performers in clustering analysis and compensated for unintentional continuous leaks.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMJ Open Respiratory Research
BMJ Open Respiratory Research RESPIRATORY SYSTEM-
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
2.40%
发文量
95
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Open Respiratory Research is a peer-reviewed, open access journal publishing respiratory and critical care medicine. It is the sister journal to Thorax and co-owned by the British Thoracic Society and BMJ. The journal focuses on robustness of methodology and scientific rigour with less emphasis on novelty or perceived impact. BMJ Open Respiratory Research operates a rapid review process, with continuous publication online, ensuring timely, up-to-date research is available worldwide. The journal publishes review articles and all research study types: Basic science including laboratory based experiments and animal models, Pilot studies or proof of concept, Observational studies, Study protocols, Registries, Clinical trials from phase I to multicentre randomised clinical trials, Systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信