Comparative evaluation of three interfaces for non-invasive ventilation: a randomized cross-over design physiologic study on healthy volunteers

Rosanna Vaschetto, Audrey De Jong, Matthieu Conseil, Fabrice Galia, Martin Mahul, Yannael Coisel, Albert Prades, Paolo Navalesi, Samir Jaber, Rosanna Vaschetto, Audrey De Jong, Matthieu Conseil, Fabrice Galia, Martin Mahul, Yannael Coisel, Albert Prades, Paolo Navalesi, Samir Jaber

Abstract

Introduction: Interface choice is crucial for non-invasive ventilation (NIV) success. We compared a new interface, the helmet next (HN), with the facial mask (FM) and the standard helmet (HS) in twelve healthy volunteers.

Methods: In this study, five NIV trials were randomly applied, preceded and followed by a trial of unassisted spontaneous breathing (SB). Baseline settings, for example, 5 cmH2O of both inspiratory pressure support (PS) and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), were applied through FM, HS and HN, while increased settings (PS and PEEP of 8 cmH2O) were only applied through HS and HN. We measured flow, airway, esophageal and gastric pressures, and calculated inspiratory effort indexes and trigger delays. Comfort was assessed with a visual-analog-scale.

Results: We found that FM, HS and HN at baseline settings were not significantly different with respect to inspiratory effort indexes and comfort. Inspiratory trigger delay and time of synchrony (TI,synchrony) were significantly improved by FM compared to both helmets, whereas expiratory trigger delay was shorter with FM, as opposed to HS only. HN at increased settings performed better than FM in decreasing inspiratory effort measured by pressure-time product of transdiaphragmatic pressure (PTPdi)/breath (10.7 ± 9.9 versus 17.0 ± 11.0 cmH2Os), and PTPdi/min (128 ± 96 versus 204 ± 81 cmH2Os/min), and PTPdi/L (12.6 ± 9.9 versus 30.2 ± 16.8 cmH2Os/L). TI, synchrony was inferior between HN and HS at increased settings and FM.

Conclusions: HN might hold some advantages with respect to interaction and synchrony between subject and ventilator, but studies on patients are needed to confirm these findings.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01610960.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Schematic representation of the experimental design. (A) Spontaneous breathing; (B) face mask; (C) helmet standard; (D) helmet next. Pao, pressure at the airway opening; Pes, esophageal pressure; Pga, gastric pressure.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Helmet next. The new helmet (Helmet next) is composed of a rigid plastic ring (1), inflatable cushion (2) with its inflating line (3), anular opening ring secured to the rigid ring underneath the cushion (4), and transparent hood (5). The helmet is secured to the head by the inflated cushion placed around the neck below the jaw.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Representative traces of a patient (patient 1) during the randomized trials for spontaneous breathing, face mask at PEEP and PS of 5 cmH2O, helmet standard at PEEP and PS of 5 cmH2O, helmet standard at PEEP and PS of 8 cmH2O, helmet next at PEEP and PS of 5 cmH2O, helmet next at PEEP and PS of 8 cmH2O, and spontaneous breathing. Pao, Flow, Pes, Pga, and Pdi are shown from top to bottom. FM, face mask; HN, helmet next; HS, helmet standard; Pao, pressure at the airway opening; Pdi, transdiaphragmatic pressure; PEEP, positive end-expiratory pressure; Pe, esophageal pressure; Pga, gastric pressure; PS, pressure support.
Figure 4
Figure 4
The pressure-time product of the transdiaphragmatic pressure calculated per breath, per minute, and per liter. (A) Calculation per breath; (B) calculation per minute; (C) calculation per liter. FM: face mask; HN: helmet next; HS: helmet standard; PEEP: positive end-expiratory pressure; PS: pressure support; PTPdi: pressure-time product of the transdiaphragmatic pressure; SB: spontaneous breathing.

References

    1. Kwok H, McCormack J, Cece R, Houtchens J, Hill NS. Controlled trial of oronasal versus nasal mask ventilation in the treatment of acute respiratory failure. Crit Care Med. 2003;31:468–473. doi: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000045563.64187.20.
    1. Navalesi P, Fanfulla F, Frigerio P, Gregoretti C, Nava S. Physiologic evaluation of noninvasive mechanical ventilation delivered with three types of masks in patients with chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure. Crit Care Med. 2000;28:1785–1790. doi: 10.1097/00003246-200006000-00015.
    1. Soo Hoo GW, Santiago S, Williams AJ. Nasal mechanical ventilation for hypercapnic respiratory failure in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: determinants of success and failure. Crit Care Med. 1994;22:1253–1261. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199408000-00009.
    1. Gregoretti C, Confalonieri M, Navalesi P, Squadrone V, Frigerio P, Beltrame F, Carbone G, Conti G, Gamna F, Nava S, Calderini E, Skrobik Y, Antonelli M. Evaluation of patient skin breakdown and comfort with a new face mask for non-invasive ventilation: a multi-center study. Intensive Care Med. 2002;28:278–284. doi: 10.1007/s00134-002-1208-7.
    1. Meduri GU. Noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation in patients with acute respiratory failure. Clin Chest Med. 1996;17:513–553. doi: 10.1016/S0272-5231(05)70330-0.
    1. Kramer N, Meyer TJ, Meharg J, Cece RD, Hill NS. Randomized, prospective trial of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation in acute respiratory failure. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1995;151:1799–1806. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.151.6.7767523.
    1. Antonelli M, Conti G, Pelosi P, Gregoretti C, Pennisi MA, Costa R, Severgnini P, Chiaranda M, Proietti R. New treatment of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: noninvasive pressure support ventilation delivered by helmet–a pilot controlled trial. Crit Care Med. 2002;30:602–608. doi: 10.1097/00003246-200203000-00019.
    1. Antonelli M, Pennisi MA, Pelosi P, Gregoretti C, Squadrone V, Rocco M, Cecchini L, Chiumello D, Severgnini P, Proietti R, Navalesi P, Conti G. Noninvasive positive pressure ventilation using a helmet in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a feasibility study. Anesthesiology. 2004;100:16–24. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200401000-00007.
    1. Chiumello D, Pelosi P, Carlesso E, Severgnini P, Aspesi M, Gamberoni C, Antonelli M, Conti G, Chiaranda M, Gattinoni L. Noninvasive positive pressure ventilation delivered by helmet vs. standard face mask. Intensive Care Med. 2003;29:1671–1679. doi: 10.1007/s00134-003-1825-9.
    1. Navalesi P, Costa R, Ceriana P, Carlucci A, Prinianakis G, Antonelli M, Conti G, Nava S. Non-invasive ventilation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients: helmet versus facial mask. Intensive Care Med. 2007;33:74–81. doi: 10.1007/s00134-006-0391-3.
    1. Racca F, Appendini L, Gregoretti C, Stra E, Patessio A, Donner CF, Ranieri VM. Effectiveness of mask and helmet interfaces to deliver noninvasive ventilation in a human model of resistive breathing. J Appl Physiol. 2005;99:1262–1271. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.01363.2004.
    1. Vargas F, Thille A, Lyazidi A, Campo FR, Brochard L. Helmet with specific settings versus facemask for noninvasive ventilation. Crit Care Med. 2009;37:1921–1928. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31819fff93.
    1. Lucchini A, Valsecchi D, Elli S, Doni V, Corsaro P, Tundo P, Re R, Foti G, Manici M. The comfort of patients ventilated with the Helmet Bundle. Assist Inferm Ric. 2010;29:174–183.
    1. Olivieri C, Costa R, Spinazzola G, Ferrone G, Longhini F, Cammarota G, Conti G, Navalesi P. Bench comparative evaluation of a new generation and standard helmet for delivering non-invasive ventilation. Intensive Care Med. 2013;39:734–738. doi: 10.1007/s00134-012-2765-z.
    1. Vaschetto R, Turucz E, Dellapiazza F, Guido S, Colombo D, Cammarota G, Della CF, Antonelli M, Navalesi P. Noninvasive ventilation after early extubation in patients recovering from hypoxemic acute respiratory failure: a single-centre feasibility study. Intensive Care Med. 2012;38:1599–1606. doi: 10.1007/s00134-012-2652-7.
    1. Girault C, Briel A, Benichou J, Hellot MF, Dachraoui F, Tamion F, Bonmarchand G. Interface strategy during noninvasive positive pressure ventilation for hypercapnic acute respiratory failure. Crit Care Med. 2009;37:124–131. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181928706.
    1. Crimi C, Noto A, Princi P, Esquinas A, Nava S. A European survey of noninvasive ventilation practices. Eur Respir J. 2010;36:362–369. doi: 10.1183/09031936.00123509.
    1. Baydur A, Behrakis PK, Zin WA, Jaeger M, Milic-Emili J. A simple method for assessing the validity of the esophageal balloon technique. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1982;126:788–791.
    1. Appendini L, Purro A, Gudjonsdottir M, Baderna P, Patessio A, Zanaboni S, Donner CF, Rossi A. Physiologic response of ventilator-dependent patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease to proportional assist ventilation and continuous positive airway pressure. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1999;159:1510–1517. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.159.5.9804130.
    1. Barnard PA, Levine S. Critique on application of diaphragmatic time-tension index to spontaneously breathing humans. J Appl Physiol. 1986;60:1067–1072.
    1. Costa R, Navalesi P, Antonelli M, Cavaliere F, Craba A, Proietti R, Conti G. Physiologic evaluation of different levels of assistance during noninvasive ventilation delivered through a helmet. Chest. 2005;128:2984–2990. doi: 10.1378/chest.128.4.2984.
    1. Brochard L, Rua F, Lorino H, Lemaire F, Harf A. Inspiratory pressure support compensates for the additional work of breathing caused by the endotracheal tube. Anesthesiology. 1991;75:739–745. doi: 10.1097/00000542-199111000-00004.
    1. Fraticelli AT, Lellouche F, L’her E, Taille S, Mancebo J, Brochard L. Physiological effects of different interfaces during noninvasive ventilation for acute respiratory failure. Crit Care Med. 2009;37:939–945. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31819b575f.
    1. Jaber S, Fodil R, Carlucci A, Boussarsar M, Pigeot J, Lemaire F, Harf A, Lofaso F, Isabey D, Brochard L. Noninvasive ventilation with helium-oxygen in acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2000;161:1191–1200. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.161.4.9904065.
    1. Gift AG. Visual analogue scales: measurement of subjective phenomena. Nurs Res. 1989;38:286–288.
    1. Vitacca M, Bianchi L, Zanotti E, Vianello A, Barbano L, Porta R, Clini E. Assessment of physiologic variables and subjective comfort under different levels of pressure support ventilation. Chest. 2004;126:851–859. doi: 10.1378/chest.126.3.851.
    1. Perez W, Tobin MJ. Separation of factors responsible for change in breathing pattern induced by instrumentation. J Appl Physiol. 1985;59:1515–1520.
    1. Weissman C, Askanazi J, Milic-Emili J, Kinney JM. Effect of respiratory apparatus on respiration. J Appl Physiol. 1984;57:475–480.

Source: PubMed

3
Subskrybuj