Construction and Performance Testing of a Fast-Assembly COVID-19 (FALCON) Emergency Ventilator in a Model of Normal and Low-Pulmonary Compliance Conditions

The development and implementation of a low-cost mechanical ventilator in a low-middle-income country during the COVID-19 pandemic: The Unisabana-HERONS

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic in Latin America generated the need to develop low-cost, fast-manufacturing mechanical ventilators. The Universidad de La Sabana and the Fundacion Neumologica Colombiana designed and manufactured the Unisabana-HERONS (USH) ventilator. Here, we present the preclinical and clinical study results to evaluate its effectiveness and safety characteristics in an animal model (Yorkshire Sow) and five patients with acute respiratory failure receiving mechanical ventilatory support for 24 h.

Methods

The effectiveness and safety outcomes included maintaining arterial blood gases and pulse oximetry saturation (SpO2), respiratory pressures and volumes (during continuous monitoring) in the range of ARDS and lung-protective strategy goals, and the occurrence of barotrauma. A significance level of 0.05 was used for statistical tests. This clinical trial was registered on Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04497623) and approved by the ethics committee.

Results

Among patients treated with the Unisabana-HERONS, the most frequent causes of acute respiratory failure were pneumonia in 3/5 (60 %) and ARDS in 2/5 (40 %). During the treatment, the ventilatory parameters related to lung protection protocols were kept within the safety range, and vital signs and blood gas were stable. The percentage of time that the respiratory pressures or volumes were out of safety range were plateau pressure >30 cm H2O: 0.00 %; driving pressure >15 cm H2O: 0.06 %; mechanical power >15 J/min: 0.00 %; and Tidal volume >8 mL/kg: 0.00 %. There were no adverse events related to the ventilator. The usability questionnaire retrieved a median score for all items between 9 and 10 (best score: 10), indicating great ease of use.

Conclusion

The Unisabana-HERONS ventilator effectively provided adequate gas exchange and maintained the ventilatory parameters in the range of lung protection strategies in humans and an animal model. Furthermore, it is straightforward to use and is a low-cost medical device.

PVP1-The People's Ventilator Project: A fully open, low-cost, pressure-controlled ventilator research platform compatible with adult and pediatric uses

Mechanical ventilators are safety-critical devices that help patients breathe, commonly found in hospital intensive care units (ICUs)-yet, the high costs and proprietary nature of commercial ventilators inhibit their use as an educational and research platform. We present a fully open ventilator device-The People's Ventilator: PVP1-with complete hardware and software documentation including detailed build instructions and a DIY cost of $1,700 USD. We validate PVP1 against both key performance criteria specified in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Emergency Use Authorization for Ventilators, and in a pediatric context against a state-of-the-art commercial ventilator. Notably, PVP1 performs well over a wide range of test conditions and performance stability is demonstrated for a minimum of 75,000 breath cycles over three days with an adult mechanical test lung. As an open project, PVP1 can enable future educational, academic, and clinical developments in the ventilator space.

Efficacy and safety testing of a COVID-19 era emergency ventilator in a healthy rabbit lung model

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic revealed a substantial and unmet need for low-cost, easily accessible mechanical ventilation strategies for use in medical resource-challenged areas. Internationally, several groups developed non-conventional COVID-19 era emergency ventilator strategies as a stopgap measure when conventional ventilators were unavailable. Here, we compared our FALCON emergency ventilator in a rabbit model and compared its safety and functionality to conventional mechanical ventilation.

Methods

New Zealand white rabbits (n = 5) received mechanical ventilation from both the FALCON and a conventional mechanical ventilator (Engström Carestation™) for 1 h each. Airflow and pressure, blood O₂ saturation, end tidal CO₂, and arterial blood gas measurements were measured. Additionally, gross and histological lung samples were compared to spontaneously breathing rabbits (n = 3) to assess signs of ventilator induced lung injury.

Results

All rabbits were successfully ventilated with the FALCON. At identical ventilator settings, tidal volumes, pressures, and respiratory rates were similar between both ventilators, but the inspiratory to expiratory ratio was lower using the FALCON. End tidal CO₂ was significantly higher on the FALCON, and arterial blood gas measurements demonstrated lower arterial partial pressure of O₂ at 30 min and higher arterial partial pressure of CO₂ at 30 and 60 min using the FALCON. However, when ventilated at higher respiratory rates, we observed a stepwise decrease in end tidal CO₂. Poincaré plot analysis demonstrated small but significant increases in short-term and long-term variation of peak inspiratory pressure generation from the FALCON. Wet to dry lung weight and lung injury scoring between the mechanically ventilated and spontaneously breathing rabbits were similar.

Conclusions

Although conventional ventilators are always preferable outside of emergency use, the FALCON ventilator safely and effectively ventilated healthy rabbits without lung injury. Emergency ventilation using accessible and inexpensive strategies like the FALCON may be useful for communities with low access to medical resources and as a backup form of emergency ventilation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s42490-022-00059-x.