Closed-loop oxygen control improves oxygenation in pediatric patients under high-flow nasal oxygen-A randomized crossover study.

Background: We assessed the effect of a closed-loop oxygen control system in pediatric patients receiving high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (HFNO). Methods: A multicentre, single-blinded, randomized, and cross-over study. Patients aged between 1 month and 18 years of age receiving HFNO for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) were randomly assigned to start with a 2-h period of closed-loop oxygen control or a 2-h period of manual oxygen titrations, after which the patient switched to the alternative therapy. The endpoints were the percentage of time spent in predefined SpO2 ranges (primary), FiO2, SpO2/FiO2, and the number of manual adjustments. Findings: We included 23 patients, aged a median of 18 (3-26) months. Patients spent more time in a predefined optimal SpO2 range when the closed-loop oxygen controller was activated compared to manual oxygen titrations [91⋅3% (IQR 78⋅4-95⋅1%) vs. 63⋅0% (IQR 44⋅4-70⋅7%)], mean difference [28⋅2% (95%-CI 20⋅6-37⋅8%); P < 0.001]. Median FiO2 was lower [33⋅3% (IQR 26⋅6-44⋅6%) vs. 42⋅6% (IQR 33⋅6-49⋅9%); P = 0.07], but median SpO2/FiO2 was higher [289 (IQR 207-348) vs. 194 (IQR 98-317); P = 0.023] with closed-loop oxygen control. The median number of manual adjustments was lower with closed-loop oxygen control [0⋅0 (IQR 0⋅0-0⋅0) vs. 0⋅5 (IQR 0⋅0-1⋅0); P < 0.001]. Conclusion: Closed-loop oxygen control improves oxygenation therapy in pediatric patients receiving HFNO for AHRF and potentially leads to more efficient oxygen use. It reduces the number of manual adjustments, which may translate into decreased workloads of healthcare providers. Clinical trial registration: [www.ClinicalTrials.gov], identifier [NCT05032365].

Automated closed-loop FiO2 titration increases the percentage of time spent in optimal zones of oxygen saturation in pediatric patients-A randomized crossover clinical trial.

Introduction: We aimed to compare automated ventilation with closed-loop control of the fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) to automated ventilation with manual titrations of the FiO2 with respect to time spent in predefined pulse oximetry (SpO2) zones in pediatric critically ill patients. Methods: This was a randomized crossover clinical trial comparing Adaptive Support Ventilation (ASV) 1.1 with use of a closed-loop FiO2 system vs. ASV 1.1 with manual FiO2 titrations. The primary endpoint was the percentage of time spent in optimal SpO2 zones. Secondary endpoints included the percentage of time spent in acceptable, suboptimal and unacceptable SpO2 zones, and the total number of FiO2 changes per patient. Results: We included 30 children with a median age of 21 (11-48) months; 12 (40%) children had pediatric ARDS. The percentage of time spent in optimal SpO2 zones increased with use of the closed-loop FiO2 controller vs. manual oxygen control [96.1 (93.7-98.6) vs. 78.4 (51.3-94.8); P < 0.001]. The percentage of time spent in acceptable, suboptimal and unacceptable zones decreased. Findings were similar with the use of closed-loop FiO2 controller compared to manual titration in patients with ARDS [95.9 (81.6-98.8) vs. 78 (49.5-94.8) %; P = 0.027]. The total number of closed-loop FiO2 changes per patient was 52 (11.8-67), vs. the number of manual changes 1 (0-2), (P < 0.001). Conclusion: In this randomized crossover trial in pediatric critically ill patients under invasive ventilation with ASV, use of a closed-loop control of FiO2 titration increased the percentage of time spent within in optimal SpO2 zones, and increased the total number of FiO2 changes per patient. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT04568642.

Validation of a novel system to assess end-expiratory lung volume and alveolar recruitment in an ARDS model.

BACKGROUND: Personalizing mechanical ventilation requires the development of reliable bedside monitoring techniques. The multiple-breaths nitrogen washin-washout (MBNW) technique is currently available to measure end-expiratory lung volume (EELVMBNW), but the precision of the technique may be poor, with percentage errors ranging from 28 to 57%. The primary aim of the study was to evaluate the reliability of a novel MBNW bedside system using fast mainstream sensors to assess EELV in an experimental acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) model, using computed tomography (CT) as the gold standard. The secondary aims of the study were: (1) to evaluate trending ability of the novel system to assess EELV; (2) to evaluate the reliability of estimated alveolar recruitment induced by positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) changes computed from EELVMBNW, using CT as the gold standard. RESULTS: Seven pigs were studied in 6 experimental conditions: at baseline, after experimental ARDS and during a decremental PEEP trial at PEEP 16, 12, 6 and 2 cmH2O. EELV was computed at each PEEP step by both the MBNW technique (EELVMBNW) and CT (EELVCT). Repeatability was assessed by performing replicate measurements. Alveolar recruitment between two consecutive PEEP levels after lung injury was measured with CT (VrecCT), and computed from EELV measurements (VrecMBNW) as ΔEELV minus the product of ΔPEEP by static compliance. EELVMBNW and EELVCT were significantly correlated (R2 = 0.97). An acceptable non-constant bias between methods was identified, slightly decreasing toward more negative values as EELV increased. The conversion equation between EELVMBNW and EELVCT was: EELVMBNW = 0.92 × EELVCT + 36. The 95% prediction interval of the bias amounted to ± 86 mL and the percentage error between both methods amounted to 13.7%. The median least significant change between repeated measurements amounted to 8% [CI95%: 4-10%]. EELVMBNW adequately tracked EELVCT changes over time (concordance rate amounting to 100% [CI95%: 87%-100%] and angular bias amounting to - 2° ± 10°). VrecMBNW and VrecCT were significantly correlated (R2 = 0.92). A non-constant bias between methods was identified, slightly increasing toward more positive values as Vrec increased. CONCLUSIONS: We report a new bedside MBNW technique that reliably assesses EELV in an experimental ARDS model with high precision and excellent trending ability.

Hysteresis and Lung Recruitment in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Patients: A CT Scan Study.

OBJECTIVES: Hysteresis of the respiratory system pressure-volume curve is related to alveolar surface forces, lung stress relaxation, and tidal reexpansion/collapse. Hysteresis has been suggested as a means of assessing lung recruitment. The objective of this study was to determine the relationship between hysteresis, mechanical characteristics of the respiratory system, and lung recruitment assessed by a CT scan in mechanically ventilated acute respiratory distress syndrome patients. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: General ICU of a university hospital. PATIENTS: Twenty-five consecutive sedated and paralyzed patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (age 64 ± 15 yr, body mass index 26 ± 6 kg/m, PaO2/FIO2 147 ± 42, and positive end-expiratory pressure 9.3 ± 1.4 cm H2O) were enrolled. INTERVENTIONS: A low-flow inflation and deflation pressure-volume curve (5-45 cm H2O) and a sustained inflation recruitment maneuver (45 cm H2O for 30 s) were performed. A lung CT scan was performed during breath-holding pressure at 5 cm H2O and during the recruitment maneuver at 45 cm H2O. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Lung recruitment was computed as the difference in noninflated tissue and in gas volume measured at 5 and at 45 cm H2O. Hysteresis was calculated as the ratio of the area enclosed by the pressure-volume curve and expressed as the hysteresis ratio. Hysteresis was correlated with respiratory system compliance computed at 5 cm H2O and the lung gas volume entering the lung during inflation of the pressure-volume curve (R = 0.749, p < 0.001 and R = 0.851, p < 0.001). The hysteresis ratio was related to both lung tissue and gas recruitment (R = 0.266, p = 0.008, R = 0.357, p = 0.002, respectively). Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed that the optimal cutoff value to predict lung tissue recruitment for the hysteresis ratio was 28% (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.62-0.98), with sensitivity and specificity of 0.75 and 0.77, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Hysteresis of the respiratory system computed by low-flow pressure-volume curve is related to the anatomical lung characteristics and has an acceptable accuracy to predict lung recruitment.

Closed loop ventilation mode in Intensive Care Unit: a randomized controlled clinical trial comparing the numbers of manual ventilator setting changes.

BACKGROUND: There is an equipoise regarding closed-loop ventilation modes and the ability to reduce workload for providers. On one hand some settings are managed by the ventilator but on another hand the automatic mode introduces new settings for the user. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial compared the number of manual ventilator setting changes between a full closed loop ventilation and oxygenation mode (INTELLiVENT-ASV®) and conventional ventilation modes (volume assist control and pressure support) in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients. The secondary endpoints were to compare the number of arterial blood gas analysis, the sedation dose and the user acceptance. Sixty subjects with an expected duration of mechanical ventilation of at least 48 hours were randomized to be ventilated using INTELLiVENT-ASV® or conventional modes with a protocolized weaning. All manual ventilator setting changes were recorded continuously from inclusion to successful extubation or death. Arterial blood gases were performed upon decision of the clinician in charge. User acceptance score was assessed for nurses and physicians once daily using a Likert Scale. RESULTS: The number of manual ventilator setting changes per 24 h-period per subject was lower in INTELLiVENT-ASV® as compared to conventional ventilation group (5 [4-7] versus 10 [7-17]) manuals settings per subject per day [P<0.001]). The number of arterial blood gas analysis and the sedation doses were not significantly different between the groups. Nurses and physicians reported that INTELLiVENT-ASV® was significantly easier to use as compared to conventional ventilation (P<0.001 for nurses and P<0.01 for physicians). CONCLUSIONS: For mechanically ventilated ICU patients, INTELLiVENT-ASV® significantly reduces the number of manual ventilator setting changes with the same number of arterial blood gas analysis and sedation dose, and is easier to use for the caregivers as compared to conventional ventilation modes.

Closed-loop ventilation mode (IntelliVent®-ASV) in intensive care unit: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Closed-loop modes automatically adjust ventilation settings, delivering individualized ventilation over short periods of time. The objective of this randomized controlled trial was to compare safety, efficacy and workload for the health care team between IntelliVent®-ASV and conventional modes over a 48-hour period. METHODS: ICU patients admitted with an expected duration of mechanical ventilation of more than 48 hours were randomized to IntelliVent®-ASV or conventional ventilation modes. All ventilation parameters were recorded breath-by-breath. The number of manual adjustments assesses workload for the healthcare team. Safety and efficacy were assessed by calculating the time spent within previously defined ranges of non-optimal and optimal ventilation, respectively. RESULTS: Eighty patients were analyzed. The median values of ventilation parameters over 48 hours were similar in both groups except for PEEP (7[4] cmH2O versus 6[3] cmH2O with IntelliVent®-ASV and conventional ventilation, respectively, P=0.028) and PETCO2 (36±7 mmHg with IntelliVent®-ASV versus 40±8 mmHg with conventional ventilation, P=0.041). Safety was similar between IntelliVent®-ASV and conventional ventilation for all parameters except for PMAX, which was more often non-optimal with IntelliVent®-ASV (P=0.001). Efficacy was comparable between the 2 ventilation strategies, except for SpO2 and VT, which were more often optimal with IntelliVent®-ASV (P=0.005, P=0.016, respectively). IntelliVent®-ASV required less manual adjustments than conventional ventilation (P<0.001) for a higher total number of adjustments (P<0.001). The coefficient of variation over 48 hours was larger with IntelliVent®-ASV in regard of maximum pressure, inspiratory pressure (PINSP), and PEEP as compared to conventional ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: IntelliVent®-ASV required less manual intervention and delivered more variable PEEP and PINSP, while delivering ventilation safe and effective ventilation in terms of VT, RR, SpO2 and PETCO2.

Safety and efficacy of a fully closed-loop control ventilation (IntelliVent-ASV®) in sedated ICU patients with acute respiratory failure: a prospective randomized crossover study.

PURPOSE: IntelliVent-ASV(®) is a development of adaptive support ventilation (ASV) that automatically adjusts ventilation and oxygenation parameters. This study assessed the safety and efficacy of IntelliVent-ASV(®) in sedated intensive care unit (ICU) patients with acute respiratory failure. METHODS: This prospective randomized crossover comparative study was conducted in a 12-bed ICU in a general hospital. Two periods of 2 h of ventilation in randomly applied ASV or IntelliVent-ASV(®) were compared in 50 sedated, passively ventilated patients. Tidal volume (V(T)), respiratory rate (RR), inspiratory pressure (P(INSP)), SpO(2) and E(T)CO(2) were continuously monitored and recorded breath by breath. Mean values over the 2-h period were calculated. Respiratory mechanics, plateau pressure (P(PLAT)) and blood gas exchanges were measured at the end of each period. RESULTS: There was no safety issue requiring premature interruption of IntelliVent-ASV(®). Minute ventilation (MV) and V(T) decreased from 7.6 (6.5-9.5) to 6.8 (6.0-8.0) L/min (p < 0.001) and from 8.3 (7.8-9.0) to 8.1 (7.7-8.6) mL/kg PBW (p = 0.003) during IntelliVent-ASV(®) as compared to ASV. P(PLAT) and FiO(2) decreased from 24 (20-29) to 20 (19-25) cmH(2)O (p = 0.005) and from 40 (30-50) to 30 (30-39) % (p < 0.001) during IntelliVent-ASV(®) as compared to ASV. RR, P(INSP), and PEEP decreased as well during IntelliVent-ASV(®) as compared to ASV. Respiratory mechanics, pH, PaO(2) and PaO(2)/FiO(2) ratio were not different but PaCO(2) was slightly higher during IntelliVent-ASV(®) as compared to ASV. CONCLUSIONS: In passive patients with acute respiratory failure, IntelliVent-ASV(®) was safe and able to ventilate patients with less pressure, volume and FiO(2) while producing the same results in terms of oxygenation.