Effects of intrapulmonary percussive ventilation on airway mucus clearance: A bench model

Clinical application of intrapulmonary percussive ventilation: A scoping review

Impaired respiratory function secondary to acute or chronic respiratory disease poses a significant clinical and healthcare burden. Intrapulmonary percussive ventilation (IPV) is used in various clinical settings to treat excessive airway secretions, pulmonary atelectasis, and impaired gas exchange. Despite IPV's wide use, there is a lack of clinical guidance on IPV application which may lead to inconsistency in clinical practice. This scoping review aimed to summarise the clinical application methods and dosage of IPV used by clinicians and researchers to provide guidance. A two-staged systematic search was conducted to retrieve studies that used IPV in inpatient and outpatient settings. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, and Google scholar were searched from January 1979 till 2022. Studies with patients aged ≥16 years and published in any language were included. Two reviewers independently screened the title and abstract, reviewed full text articles, and extracted data. Search yielded 514 studies. After removing duplicates and irrelevant studies, 25 studies with 905 participants met the inclusion criteria. This is the first scoping review to summarise IPV application methods and dosages from the available studies in intensive care unit (ICU), acute inpatient (non-ICU), and outpatient settings. Some variations in clinical applications and prescribed dosages of IPV were noted. Despite variations, common trends in clinical application and prescription of IPV dosages were observed and summarised to assist clinicians with IPV intervention. Although an evidence-based clinical guideline could not be provided, this review provides detailed information on IPV application and dosages in order to provide clinical guidance and lays a foundation towards developing a clinical practice guideline in the future.

Pressure-controlled ventilation-volume guaranteed mode improves bronchial mucus transport velocity in patients during laparoscopic surgery for gynecological oncology: a randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Mechanical ventilation during general anesthesia may impair airway mucosal function. This study aimed to investigate the effect of pressure-controlled ventilation-volume guaranteed (PCV-VG) on bronchial mucus transport velocity (BTV) in patients during laparoscopic surgery for gynecological oncology compared with volume controlled ventilation (VCV).

METHODS

66 patients undergoing elective a laparoscopic surgery for gynecological oncology. The patients were randomized into two group receiving either PCV-VG or VCV. a drop of methylene blue was placed on the surface of the airway mucosa under the bronchoscopeand, then the distance the dye movement was measured after 2, 4, and 6 min. Outcomes were assessed at T0 (5 min after endotracheal intubation and before initiation of pneumoperitoneum), T1 and T2 (1 and 2 h after stabilization of pneumoperitoneum respectively). BTV at T0, T1 and T2 was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), body temperature, end-tidal CO2 pressure (PETCO2), tidal volume(VT), peak inspiratory pressure (PIP), mean inspiratory pressure (Pmean), respiratory rate (RR), and dynamic compliance (CDyn) at T0, T1, and T2.

RESULTS

64 patients were included in the analysis. The median [interquartile range] BTV was significantly lower in VCV group at T1 and T2 that at T0 (P < 0.05). Furthermore, BTV was slightly reduced in PCV-VG compared with VCV. BTV in PCV-VG was significantly decreased at T2 compared with BTV at T0 (P < 0.05) and slightly decreased at T1 compared with T0(P > 0.05). Compared with the PCV-VG group, BTV in VCV group significantly decreased at T2 (P < 0.05). No participants experienced respiratory complications.

CONCLUSIONS

PCV-VG is more suitable for patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery for gynecological oncology than VCV since it can protect mucociliary clearance function.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered on https://www.chictr.org.cn/ in Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR.2200064564: Date of registration 11/10/2022).

Ex-vivo effects of intrapulmonary percussive ventilation on sputum rheological properties

Intrapulmonary percussive ventilation (IPV) has been postulated to enhance mucociliary clearance by improving tracheobronchial sputum rheological properties. The IPV effects on linear (viscoelasticity) and non-linear (flowing) rheological properties of 40 sputum samples collected from 19 patients with muco-obstructive lung diseases were investigated ex-vivo. Each sputum sample was split into 4 aliquots. These aliquots were independently placed in a circuit connected on one side to an IPV device and on the other side to a lung model that simulated spontaneous adult breaths. IPV was superimposed on simulated breathing. Three aliquots were exposed to a different IPV setting, modifying either percussion frequency or amplitude (4 Hz-200 L/min, 10 Hz-200 L/min, 10 Hz-140 L/min). One aliquot was only exposed to breathing (IPV was switched off, control condition). Each aliquot underwent 5 min of the pre-fixed mechanical stimulation before being recollected to proceed to rheological analysis. Neither percussion frequencies nor amplitudes had a significant impact on any sputum rheological properties studied. These results need to be confirmed in vivo.

Demonstration of mucus simulant clearance in a Bench-Model using acoustic Field-Integrated Intrapulmonary Percussive ventilation

Intrapulmonary Percussive Ventilation (IPV) is a high-frequency airway clearance technique used to help in mucus transport for mechanically ventilated and unventilated patients. Despite the many years of usage, this technique does not provide clear evidence of its intended efficacy. This is mainly attributable to the lack of in vitro observations that show "mucokinesis" towards the direction of the mouth. In the current manuscript, we demonstrate and subsequently propose a mechanism that details the movement of a mucus simulant in the proximal (towards the mouthpiece) direction. Towards this end, a novel method utilizing a high-frequency acoustic field in addition to the conventional air pulsations brought forth by traditional IPV is proposed. Under these conditions, at certain parameter settings, it is shown that the simulant is broken down into much smaller parts and subsequently pushed in the upstream direction gradually over a period of half-hour.

Feasibility and safety of intrapulmonary percussive ventilation in spontaneously breathing, non-ventilated patients in critical care: A retrospective pilot study

Background

Intrapulmonary percussive ventilation is used in various clinical settings to promote secretion clearance, reverse or treat atelectasis and improve gas exchange. Despite a few studies reporting the use of intrapulmonary percussive ventilation in critical care, the available data remain insufficient, contributing to weaker evidence toward its effectiveness. Also, there is a paucity of studies evaluating the safety and feasibility of intrapulmonary percussive ventilation application in critical care. This retrospective pilot study has evaluated the safety and feasibility of intrapulmonary percussive ventilation intervention in non-intubated patients admitted to an intensive care unit.

Methods

The medical records of 35 subjects were reviewed, including 22 subjects who received intrapulmonary percussive ventilation intervention and 13 subjects matched for age, sex, and primary diagnosis who received chest physiotherapy. The records were audited for feasibility, safety, changes in oxygen saturation, chest X-ray changes, and intensive care unit length of stay.

Results

A total of 104 treatment sessions (IPV 65 and CPT 39) were delivered to subjects admitted with a range of respiratory conditions in critical care. Subjects completed 97% of IPV sessions. No major adverse events were reported with intrapulmonary percussive ventilation intervention. Intensive care unit length of stay in the intrapulmonary percussive ventilation group was 9.6 ± 6 days, and in the CPT group, it was 11 ± 9 days (p = 0.59). Peripheral oxygen saturation pre to post intervention was 92% ± 4 to 96% ± 4 in IPV group and 95% ± 4 to 95% ± 3 in the CPT group.

Conclusion

Application of intrapulmonary percussive ventilation intervention was feasible and safe in non-ventilated adult patients in critical care.