2004 OPEN FORUM Abstracts
TIDAL VOLUME DELIVERY DURING NASAL SIMV IN NEONATES
Kathleen
Deakins RRT-NPS, Robert L. Chatburn RRT-NPS FAARC Rainbow
Babies & Children’s Hospital, Cleveland, OH
Introduction:
Noninvasive ventilation of neonates using pressure controlled
SIMV through nasal prongs has been shown to improve outcomes compared
to nasal CPAP alone. (Nasal intermittent positive pressure
ventilation versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure for
preterm neonates after extubation:
The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2004) However, no
studies have provided data regarding potential tidal volume delivery.
The purpose of this bench evaluation was to determine the effects of
ventilating pressure, inspiratory time and cannula type on volume
delivery.
Methods: A simple volume displacement test was
performed using four nasal CPAP delivery devices. A capped, inverted
30 mL syringe, (plunger removed) was filled with water, supported by
a double burette clamp and one end immersed in water. A 3.0mm
endotracheal tube adapter was attached to an infant nasal cannula
(Salter Laboratories). The cannula was then connected to an
Infrasonics Infant Star ventilator. The prongs of the cannula were
placed under water inside the syringe. The ventilator was set to
cycle at a frequency of 15/min, peak pressures 5 and 10 cm H20
and inspiratory times 0.3 and 0.5 seconds at flows of 8 L/min (PEEP
= 0). The volume of water displaced over five consecutive breaths was
recorded. The procedure was repeated using small nasal CPAP prongs
(Medicomp.) and (Fisher & Paykel), and 2.5 mm O.D.7.5 French
Binasal airway (Neotech).
Results: Experimental data are shown
in the table below.
| TI | P | Volume (mL) | ||
| Device | (seconds) | (cm H2O) | mean | SD |
| cannula (Salter) | 0.3 | 5 | 0.3 | 0.10 |
| 0.5 | 5 | 0.4 | 0.06 | |
| 0.3 | 10 | 1.0 | 0.00 | |
| 0.5 | 10 | 2.5 | 0.06 | |
| prongs (Medicomp) | 0.3 | 5 | 8.3 | 1.53 |
| 0.5 | 5 | 11.0 | 1.00 | |
| 0.3 | 10 | 14.3 | 0.58 | |
| 0.5 | 10 | 22.7 | 1.15 | |
| prongs (Fisher) | 0.3 | 5 | 10.0 | 0.00 |
| 0.5 | 5 | 13.7 | 1.53 | |
| 0.3 | 10 | 14.7 | 2.52 | |
| 0.5 | 10 | 25.3 | 1.53 | |
| nasopharyngeal | 0.3 | 5 | 4.0 | 0.00 |
| prongs (Neotech) | 0.5 | 5 | 9.7 | 1.15 |
| 0.3 | 10 | 10.3 | 1.53 | |
| 0.5 | 10 | 10.8 | 1.44 | |
Conclusion:
As expected, volume delivery through the fixed resistance of the
prongs and cannula was proportional to inspiratory time for all
delivery devices. Volume delivery was greatest with the nasal prongs
because they had the greatest internal diameter. Selection of
appropriate ventilator settings to avoid potentially dangerous volume
delivery is highly dependent on the type of delivery device. In our
clinical experience, nasal CPAP prongs are the best choice for
delivering nasal SIMV using peak pressures of 20 (
P15) and inspiratory time of 0.5 seconds. Nasal cannula should be
used only when CPAP prongs are too large for the premature infant.