Variety of Expiratory Resistance Between Different Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Devices for Preterm Infants

被引:21
作者
Wald, Martin [1 ]
Kribs, Angela [2 ]
Jeitler, Valerie [1 ]
Lirsch, Dominik [1 ]
Pollak, Arnold [1 ]
Kirchner, Lieselotte [1 ]
机构
[1] Med Univ Vienna, Dept Pediat & Adolescent Med, Div Gen Pediat & Neonatol, A-1090 Vienna, Austria
[2] Univ Cologne, Dept Neonatol, Childrens Hosp, Cologne, Germany
关键词
Expiratory resistance; CPAP ventilation; Preterm infant; RESPIRATORY-DISTRESS SYNDROME; NEONATAL RESUSCITATION; CPAP; FLOW; VENTILATION; EXTUBATION;
D O I
10.1111/j.1525-1594.2010.01020.x
中图分类号
R318 [生物医学工程];
学科分类号
0831 ;
摘要
Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) systems for preterm infants work with conventional ventilators or use a jet ventilation system. It is assumed that the most important advantage of jet-CPAP systems is a lower expiratory resistance (R(E)). We investigated the R(E) of seven different CPAP systems. We studied two primary-care CPAP systems, three jet-CPAP generators, and two conventional CPAP devices. All devices were adjusted at 6 mbar and connected with a test lung simulating a standardized expiration volume. Maximum pressure increase during expiration was measured and maximum R(E) was calculated. In primary-care CPAP devices, the maximum R(E) of the Benveniste valve was 9.7 mbar/L/s (SD 1.2) while that of the Neopuff was 102.8 mbar/L/s (SD 7.9) (P < 0.01). In jet-CPAP devices, the RE of the Infant Flow was 6.8 mbar/L/s (SD 1.7), the one of the Medijet REF 1000 was 43.5 mbar/L/s (SD 1.5), and that of the Medijet REF 1010 was 36.7 mbar/L/s (SD 0.3) (P < 0.01). In conventional CPAP systems, the R(E) of the Baby Flow was 29.7 mbar/L/s (SD 1.1) and that of the Bubble CPAP was 37.1 mbar/L/s (SD 4.3) (P < 0.01). All CPAP devices created an R(E). Jet-CPAP devices did not produce lower R(E) than conventional CPAP devices.
引用
收藏
页码:22 / 28
页数:7
相关论文
共 22 条
[1]   A comparison of three neonatal resuscitation devices [J].
Bennett, S ;
Finer, NN ;
Rich, W ;
Vaucher, Y .
RESUSCITATION, 2005, 67 (01) :113-118
[2]   A VALVE SUBSTITUTE WITH NO MOVING PARTS FOR ARTIFICIAL VENTILATION IN NEWBORN AND SMALL INFANTS [J].
BENVENIS.D ;
PEDERSEN, JE .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 1968, 40 (06) :464-&
[3]   CONTINUOUS POSITIVE AIRWAY PRESSURE BREATHING (CPAP) [J].
CREW, AD ;
WALL, E ;
VARKONYI, PI .
ANAESTHESIA, 1975, 30 (01) :67-72
[4]   A randomised controlled trial of two methods of delivering nasal continuous positive airway pressure after extubation to infants weighing less than 1000 g: binasal (Hudson) versus single nasal prongs [J].
Davis, P ;
Davies, M ;
Faber, B .
ARCHIVES OF DISEASE IN CHILDHOOD-FETAL AND NEONATAL EDITION, 2001, 85 (02) :F82-F85
[5]  
De Paoli AG, 2008, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, V23, DOI DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD002977.PUB2.REVIEW
[6]   PEEP AND CPAP [J].
DUNCAN, AW ;
OH, TE ;
HILLMAN, DR .
ANAESTHESIA AND INTENSIVE CARE, 1986, 14 (03) :236-250
[7]   Comparison of methods of bag and mask ventilation for neonatal resuscitation [J].
Finer, NN ;
Wade, RA ;
Craft, A ;
Henderson, C .
RESUSCITATION, 2001, 49 (03) :299-305
[8]   Assessment of volume and leak measurements during CPAP using a neonatal lung model [J].
Fischer, H. S. ;
Roehr, C. C. ;
Proquitte, H. ;
Wauer, R. R. ;
Schmalisch, G. .
PHYSIOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 2008, 29 (01) :95-107
[9]   TREATMENT OF IDIOPATHIC RESPIRATORY-DISTRESS SYNDROME WITH CONTINUOUS POSITIVE AIRWAY PRESSURE [J].
GREGORY, GA ;
KITTERMAN, JA ;
PHIBBS, RH ;
TOOLEY, WH ;
HAMILTON, WK .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1971, 284 (24) :1333-+
[10]  
Gutierrez Laso A, 2003, An Pediatr (Barc), V58, P350