Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Intensive Care Medicine
Published in: Intensive Care Medicine 2/2011

01-02-2011 | Original

Comparison of patient–ventilator interfaces based on their computerized effective dead space

Authors: R. Fodil, F. Lellouche, J. Mancebo, G. Sbirlea-Apiou, D. Isabey, L. Brochard, B. Louis

Published in: Intensive Care Medicine | Issue 2/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Non-invasive ventilation is largely used to treat acute and chronic respiratory failure. This ventilation encounters a non-negligible rate of failure related to the used interface/mask, but the reasons for this failure remain unclear. In order to shed light on this issue and to better understand the effects of the geometrical design of interfaces, we aimed to quantify flow, pressure and gas composition in terms of CO2 and O2 at the passage through different types of interface (oronasal mask, integral mask and helmet). In particular, we postulated that due to specific gas flow passing throughout the interface, the effective dead space added by the interface is not always related to the whole gas volume included in the interface.

Methods

Numerical simulations, using computational fluid dynamics, were used to describe pressure, flow and gas composition during ventilation with the different interfaces.

Results

Between the different interfaces the effective dead spaces differed only modestly (110–370 ml), whereas their internal volumes were markedly different (110–10,000 ml). Effective dead space was limited to half the tidal volume for the most voluminous interface, whereas it was close to the interface gas volume for the less voluminous interfaces. Pressure variations induced by the flow ventilation throughout the interface were negligible.

Conclusions

Effective dead space is not related to the internal gas volume included in the interface, suggesting that this internal volume should not be considered as a limiting factor for their efficacy during non-invasive ventilation. Patient’s comfort and synchrony have also to be taken into account.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Tarabini Fraticelli A, Lellouche F, L’Her E, Taille S, Mancebo J, Brochard L (2009) Physiological effects of different interfaces during noninvasive ventilation for acute respiratory failure. Crit Care Med 37:939–945CrossRef
2.
Mehta S, Hill NS (2001) Noninvasive ventilation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 163:540–577PubMed
3.
Brochard L, Mancebo J, Wysocki M, Lofaso F, Conti G, Rauss A, Simonneau G, Benito S, Gasparetto A, Lemaire F et al (1995) Noninvasive ventilation for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. N Engl J Med 333:817–822CrossRefPubMed
4.
Nava S, Ambrosino N, Clini E, Prato M, Orlando G, Vitacca M, Brigada P, Fracchia C, Rubini F (1998) Noninvasive mechanical ventilation in the weaning of patients with respiratory failure due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 128:721–728PubMed
5.
Carlucci A, Richard JC, Wysocki M, Lepage E, Brochard L (2001) Noninvasive versus conventional mechanical ventilation. An epidemiologic survey. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 163:874–880PubMed
6.
Girault C, Briel A, Hellot MF, Tamion F, Woinet D, Leroy J, Bonmarchand G (2003) Noninvasive mechanical ventilation in clinical practice: a 2-year experience in a medical intensive care unit. Crit Care Med 31:552–559CrossRefPubMed
7.
Robino C, Faisy C, Diehl JL, Rezgui N, Labrousse J, Guerot E (2003) Effectiveness of non-invasive positive pressure ventilation differs between decompensated chronic restrictive and obstructive pulmonary disease patients. Intensive Care Med 29:603–610PubMed
8.
Chiumello D (2006) Is the helmet different than the face mask in delivering noninvasive ventilation? Chest 129:1402–1403CrossRefPubMed
9.
Cuvelier A, Pujol W, Pramil S, Molano LC, Viacroze C, Muir JF (2009) Cephalic versus oronasal mask for noninvasive ventilation in acute hypercapnic respiratory failure. Intensive Care Med 35:519–526CrossRefPubMed
10.
Antonelli M, Conti G, Pelosi P, Gregoretti C, Pennisi MA, Costa R, Severgnini P, Chiaranda M, Proietti R (2002) New treatment of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: noninvasive pressure support ventilation delivered by helmet—a pilot controlled trial. Crit Care Med 30:602–608CrossRefPubMed
11.
Bellani G, Patroniti N, Greco M, Foti G, Pesenti A (2008) The use of helmets to deliver non-invasive continuous positive airway pressure in hypoxemic acute respiratory failure. Minerva Anestesiol 74:651–656PubMed
12.
Chiumello D, Pelosi P, Carlesso E, Severgnini P, Aspesi M, Gamberoni C, Antonelli M, Conti G, Chiaranda M, Gattinoni L (2003) Noninvasive positive pressure ventilation delivered by helmet vs standard face mask. Intensive Care Med 29:1671–1679CrossRefPubMed
13.
Mortimore IL, Whittle AT, Douglas NJ (1998) Comparison of nose and face mask CPAP therapy for sleep apnoea. Thorax 53:290–292CrossRefPubMed
14.
Navalesi P, Fanfulla F, Frigerio P, Gregoretti C, Nava S (2000) Physiologic evaluation of noninvasive mechanical ventilation delivered with three types of masks in patients with chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure. Crit Care Med 28:1785–1790CrossRefPubMed
15.
Pelosi P, Severgnini P, Aspesi M, Gamberoni C, Chiumello D, Fachinetti C, Introzzi L, Antonelli M, Chiaranda M (2003) Non-invasive ventilation delivered by conventional interfaces and helmet in the emergency department. Eur J Emerg Med 10:79–86CrossRefPubMed
16.
Racca F, Appendini L, Gregoretti C, Stra E, Patessio A, Donner CF, Ranieri VM (2005) Effectiveness of mask and helmet interfaces to deliver noninvasive ventilation in a human model of resistive breathing. J Appl Physiol 99:1262–1271CrossRefPubMed
17.
Taccone P, Hess D, Caironi P, Bigatello LM (2004) Continuous positive airway pressure delivered with a “helmet”: effects on carbon dioxide rebreathing. Crit Care Med 32:2090–2096CrossRefPubMed
18.
Vargas F, Thille A, Lyazidi A, Campo FR, Brochard L (2009) Helmet with specific settings versus facemask for noninvasive ventilation. Crit Care Med 37:1921–1928CrossRefPubMed
19.
Lellouche F, Maggiore SM, Deye N, Taille S, Pigeot J, Harf A, Brochard L (2002) Effect of the humidification device on the work of breathing during noninvasive ventilation. Intensive Care Med 28:1582–1589CrossRefPubMed
20.
Saatci E, Miller DM, Stell IM, Lee KC, Moxham J (2004) Dynamic dead space in face masks used with noninvasive ventilators: a lung model study. Eur Respir J 23:129–135CrossRefPubMed
21.
Anton A, Tarrega J, Giner J, Guell R, Sanchis J (2003) Acute physiologic effects of nasal and full-face masks during noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation in patients with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Respir Care 48:922–925PubMed
22.
Gregoretti C, Confalonieri M, Navalesi P, Squadrone V, Frigerio P, Beltrame F, Carbone G, Conti G, Gamna F, Nava S, Calderini E, Skrobik Y, Antonelli M (2002) Evaluation of patient skin breakdown and comfort with a new face mask for non-invasive ventilation: a multi-center study. Intensive Care Med 28:278–284CrossRefPubMed
23.
Colaizy TT, Younis UM, Bell EF, Klein JM (2008) Nasal high-frequency ventilation for premature infants. Acta Paediatr 97:1518–1522CrossRefPubMed
24.
Fauroux B, Leroux K, Desmarais G, Isabey D, Clement A, Lofaso F, Louis B (2008) Performance of ventilators for noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation in children. Eur Respir J 31:1300–1307CrossRefPubMed
25.
Louis B, Leroux K, Isabey D, Fauroux B, Lofaso F (2009) Effect of manufacturers inserted mask leaks on ventilator performance. Eur Respir J 35:627–636CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Comparison of patient–ventilator interfaces based on their computerized effective dead space
Authors
R. Fodil
F. Lellouche
J. Mancebo
G. Sbirlea-Apiou
D. Isabey
L. Brochard
B. Louis
Publication date
01-02-2011
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Intensive Care Medicine / Issue 2/2011
Print ISSN: 0342-4642
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1238
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-010-2066-3

Other articles of this Issue 2/2011

Intensive Care Medicine 2/2011 Go to the issue

Original

Peripherally inserted central venous catheters and central venous catheters related thrombosis in post-critical patients

Original

Use of early corticosteroid therapy on ICU admission in patients affected by severe pandemic (H1N1)v influenza A infection

Year in Review 2010

Year in review in Intensive Care Medicine 2010: II. Pneumonia and infections, cardiovascular and haemodynamics, organization, education, haematology, nutrition, ethics and miscellanea

Review

Towards a sensible comprehension of severe community-acquired pneumonia

Physiological and Technological Notes

Accuracy of a transcutaneous carbon dioxide pressure monitoring device in emergency room patients with acute respiratory failure

Original

Short-term survival by treatment among patients hospitalized with acute heart failure: the global ALARM-HF registry using propensity scoring methods