Exhalatory dynamic interactions between patients connected to a shared ventilation device

• Published in: PloS one 2021-05, Vol.16 (5), p.e0250672
• Main Authors: Garcia Eijo, Pedro M, D'Adamo, Juan, Bianchetti, Arturo, Duriez, Thomas, Cabaleiro, Juan M, Irrazabal, Célica, Otero, Pablo, Artana, Guillermo
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Biology and Life Sciences; Computer and Information Sciences; Engineering and Technology; Evaluation; Exhalation - physiology; Humans; Medicine and Health Sciences; Patient compliance; Physical Sciences; Positive-Pressure Respiration - instrumentation; Respiration, Artificial - instrumentation; Respiration, Artificial - methods; Tidal Volume; Ventilators; Ventilators, Mechanical
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0250672

In this work a shared pressure-controlled ventilation device for two patients is considered. By the use of different valves incorporated to the circuit, the device enables the restriction of possible cross contamination and the individualization of tidal volumes, driving pressures, and positive end expiratory pressure PEEP. Possible interactions in the expiratory dynamics of different pairs of patients are evaluated in terms of the characteristic exhalatory times. These characteristic times can not be easily established using simple linear lumped element models. For this purpose, a 1D model using the Hydraulic and Mechanical libraries in Matlab Simulink was developed. In this sense, experiments accompany this study to validate the model and characterize the different valves of the circuit. Our results show that connecting two patients in parallel to a ventilator always resulted in delays of time during the exhalation. The size of this effect depends on different parameters associated with the patients, the circuit and the ventilator. The dynamics of the exhalation of both patients is determined by the ratios between patients exhalatory resistances, compliances, driving pressures and PEEPs. Adverse effects on exhalations became less noticeable when respiratory parameters of both patients were similar, flow resistances of valves added to the circuit were negligible, and when the ventilator exhalatory valve resistance was also negligible. The asymmetries of driving pressures, compliances or resistances exacerbated the possibility of auto-PEEP and the increase in relaxation times became greater in one patient than in the other. In contrast, exhalatory dynamics were less sensitive to the ratio of PEEP imposed to the patients.