English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) is generally delivered using pneumatically-triggered and cycled-off pressure support (PS P ) through a mask. Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA) is the only ventilatory mode that uses a non-pneumatic signal, i.e., diaphragm electrical activity (EAdi), to trigger and drive ventilator assistance. A specific setting to generate neurally controlled pressure support (PS N ) was recently proposed for delivering NIV by helmet. We compared PS N  with PS P  and NAVA during NIV using a facial mask, with respect to patient comfort, gas exchange, and patient-ventilator interaction and synchrony.    Methods  Three 30-minute trials of NIV were randomly delivered to 14 patients immediately after extubation to prevent post-extubation respiratory failure: (1) PS P , with an inspiratory support ≥8 cmH 2 O; (2) NAVA, adjusting the NAVA level to achieve a comparable peak EAdi (EAdi peak ) as during PS P ; and (3) PS N , setting the NAVA level at 15 cmH 2 O/μV with an upper airway pressure (Paw) limit to obtain the same overall Paw applied during PS P . We assessed patient comfort, peak inspiratory flow (PIF), time to reach PIF (PIF time ), EAdi peak , arterial blood gases, pressure-time product of the first 300 ms (PTP 300-index ) and 500 ms (PTP 500-index ) after initiation of patient effort, inspiratory trigger delay (Delay TR-insp ), and rate of asynchrony, determined as asynchrony index (AI%). The categorical variables were compared using the McNemar test, and continuous variables by the Friedman test followed by the Wilcoxon test with Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons ( p  < 0.017).    Results  PS N  significantly improved patient comfort, compared to both PS P  ( p  = 0.001) and NAVA ( p  = 0.002), without differences between the two latter ( p  = 0.08). PIF ( p  = 0.109), EAdi peak  ( p  = 0.931) and gas exchange were similar between modes. Compared to PS P  and NAVA, PS N  reduced PIF time  ( p  < 0.001), and increased PTP 300-index  ( p  = 0.004) and PTP 500-index  ( p  = 0.001). NAVA and PS N  significantly reduced Delay TR-insp , as opposed to PS P  ( p  < 0.001). During both NAVA and PS N , AI% was <10% in all patients, while AI% was ≥10% in 7 patients (50%) with PS P  ( p  = 0.023 compared with both NAVA and PS N ).    Conclusions  Compared to both PS P  and NAVA, PS N  improved comfort and patient-ventilator interaction during NIV by facial mask. PS N  also improved synchrony, as opposed to PS P  only.    Trial registration  ClinicalTrials.gov,  NCT03041402 . Registered (retrospectively) on 2 February 2017.

New setting of neurally adjusted ventilatory assist for noninvasive ventilation by facial mask: a physiologic study