Performance characteristics of high-frequency percussive ventilation under hyperbaric conditions.
Undersea Hyperb Med 2021;
48:157-168. [PMID:
33975406 DOI:
10.22462/03.04.2021.6]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION
Safe administration of critical care hyperbaric medicine requires specialized equipment and advanced training. Equipment must be tested in order to evaluate function in the hyperbaric environment. High-frequency percussive ventilation (HFPV) has been used in intensive care settings effectively, but it has never been tested in a hyperbaric chamber.
METHODS
Following a modified U.S. Navy testing protocol used to evaluate hyperbaric ventilators, we evaluated an HFPV transport ventilator in a multiplace hyperbaric chamber at 1.0, 1.9, and 2.8 atmospheres absolute (ATA). We used a test lung with analytical software for data collection. The ventilator uses simultaneous cyclic pressure-controlled ventilation at a pulsatile flow rate (PFR)/oscillatory continuous positive airway pressure (oCPAP) ratio of 30/10 with a high-frequency oscillation percussive rate of 500 beats per minute. Inspiratory and expiratory times were maintained at two seconds throughout each breathing cycle.
RESULTS
During manned studies, the PFR/oCPAP ratios were 26/6, 22/7, and 22.5/8 at an airway resistance of 20cm H2O/L/second and 18/9, 15.2/8.5, and 13.6/7 at an airway resistance of 50 cm/H2O/L/second at 1, 1.9, and 2.8 ATA. The resulting release volumes were 800, 547, and 513 mL at airway resistance of 20 cm H2O/L/sec and 400, 253, and 180 mL at airway resistance of 50 cm/H2O/L/sec at 1, 1.9, and 2.8 ATA. Unmanned testing showed similar changes. The mean airway pressure (MAP) remained stable throughout all test conditions; theoretically, supporting adequate lung recruitment and gas exchange. A case where HFPV was used to treat a patient for CO poisoning was presented to illustrate that HFPV worked well under HBO2 conditions and no complications occurred during HBO2 treatment.
CONCLUSION
The HFPV transport ventilator performed adequately under hyperbaric conditions and should be considered a viable option for hyperbaric critical care. This ventilator has atypical terminology and produces unique pulmonary physiology, thus requiring specialized training prior to use.
Collapse