Influence of different noninvasive oxygenation support devices on tidal volume

• Published in: Annals of intensive care 2023-11, Vol.13 (1), p.116-116, Article 116
• Main Authors: Haudebourg, Anne-Fleur, Maraffi, Tommaso, Tuffet, Samuel, Le Corvoisier, Philippe, Mekontso Dessap, Armand, Carteaux, Guillaume
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Airway management; Anesthesiology; Continuous positive airway pressure; Critical Care Medicine; Emergency Medicine; High-flow oxygen through nasal cannula; Intensive; Intensive care; Life Sciences; Medical technology; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Noninvasive ventilation; Oxygen therapy; Respiration; Respiratory failure; Tidal volume
• ISSN: 2110-5820; 2110-5820
• DOI: 10.1186/s13613-023-01200-2

Background Multiple devices are available for noninvasive oxygenation support, including non-rebreather oxygen mask (O 2 -mask), high-flow oxygen through nasal cannula (HFNC), continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), mask noninvasive ventilation (Mask-NIV) and helmet NIV (Helmet-NIV). As tidal volume is a key determinant of efficacy and safety during ventilatory support, we assessed whether it was influenced by the type of noninvasive oxygenation device. Methods A bench study using a manikin with a realistic face connected to a lung simulator was performed. Six conditions were assessed: no device, O 2 -mask, HFNC, CPAP, Mask-NIV and Helmet-NIV. Three respiratory mechanics were simulated (normal, obstructive, restrictive), at three simulated efforts (low, moderate, respiratory distress). Flow was recorded at the lung simulator inlet and mouth pressure into the manikin mouth. The same devices were evaluated on healthy volunteers with tidal volume assessed by electrical impedance tomography (EIT). Results Tidal volume was significantly influenced by oxygenation devices in bench model. As compared to O 2 -mask, HFNC and CPAP delivered significantly lower tidal volumes (440 ± 352 mL, 414 ± 333 mL and 377 ± 297 mL, respectively), while Mask-NIV or Helmet-NIV were associated with significantly higher tidal volumes (690 ± 321 mL and 652 ± 366 mL, respectively). Tidal volume was strongly correlated with the specific effect of each device on mouth pressure during inspiration: HFNC and CPAP were characterized by a negative PTPmouth (− 0.3 [− 0.8 to − 0.2] and − 0.7 [− 2.2 to − 0.5] cmH 2 O.sec/cycle, respectively), while Helmet-NIV and Mask-NIV were associated with a positive PTPmouth (4.5 [4.1–4.6] and 6.1 [5.9–7.1] cmH 2 O.sec/cycle, respectively). Tidal volume was also significantly influenced by oxygenation devices in healthy volunteers, with similar tidal volumes between O 2 -mask and CPAP (644 [571–764] and 648 [586–770] mL) but higher with HFNC, Mask-NIV and Helmet-NIV (819 [609–918], 1110 [661–1305] and 1086 [833–1243] mL). Conclusions Tidal volume is significantly influenced by noninvasive oxygenation support devices, with a strong correlation with the pressure variation generated into the mouth during inspiration. NIV was associated with the highest tidal volumes and CPAP with the lowest ones. Clinical studies are needed to clarify the clinical implications of these effects.