The Science Journal of the American Association for Respiratory Care

2006 OPEN FORUM Abstracts

PORTABLE VENTILATORS : A COMPARISON OF DURATION OF OPERATION FROM AN E-CYLINDER

Ellen Lyons RRT,  Jay Johannigman MD, Kenneth Davis MD, Betty Tsuei MD & Richard Branson RRT.  University of Cincinnati, Department of Surgery, Cincinnati, OH 45267-0558.

Background: Portable ventilators (PV) used for transport have variable gas consumption characteristics based on control system and operation.  

Methods:  Five PV were studied : BioMed Devices IC-2A,  Impact Eagle 754, Newport HT-50, Pulmonetics LTV-1000 and VersaMed iVent.  Only 1 of each device was studied.  All PV were set up according to manufacturers recommendations.  Appropriate ventilator circuits were connected to each PV and to a test lung (TTL, Michigan Instruments).  Lung compliance was 50 ml/cm H2O and resistance was 5 cm H2O/L/s.  PV were operated at three conditions: 1) Rate of 10 breaths/min, VT of 1.0L, PEEP of 0 cm H2O, 2)  Rate of 10 breaths/min, VT of 1.0L, PEEP of 20 cm H2O, and 3) Rate of 20 breaths/min, VT of 0.5L, PEEP of 0 cm H2O.  Minute ventilation (10 L/min) and FIO2 (100%) were kept constant.  Inspiratory time was 1.0 seconds and flow was 60 L/min. Runs were made in triplicate.. A pneumotachograph was placed between the ventilator circuit and test lung to record the minute ventilation and duration of operation.  

Results:  Duration of operation from an E-cylinder was significantly different between PV. PEEP of 20 cm H2O resulted in a slight decrease in duration of operation in all ventilators.  Table 1 demonstrates results of the study. Data is minutes of operation (mean ± SD).

Ventilator 10 x 1000 0 PEEP 10 x 1000 20 PEEP 20 x 500 0 PEEP p- value
1 vs 2 1 vs 3 2 vs 3
IC-2A 37 ± 1 35 ± 2.3 32 ± 1.6 0.19 0.06 0.05
754 73 ± 2.3 69 ± 1.7 75 ± 6.1 0.03 0.38 0.21
HT-50 72 ± 5.6 66 ± 8.4 69 ± 4.9 0.32 0.4 0.2
LTV-1000 42 ± 1 39 ± 1 38 ± 2.3 0.24 0.28 0.51
iVent 69 ± 1 60 ± 2.2 68 ± 4.2 0.03 0.4 0.17

Duration of operation was significantly longer for the Impact 754 and HT-50 vs iVent (p < 0.05), and LTV 1000 and IC-2A (p <0.001) at each condition. 

Conclusions: Gas consumption of PV varies with driving mechanism, use of continuous flow, and elevated PEEP.  Understanding duration of operation from an E-cylinder and gas consumption is important in utilization of ventilators.  This study looks at only one facet of PV operation, ventilator comparisons should include evaluation of many performance characteristics.

You are here: RCJournal.com » Past OPEN FORUM Abstracts » 2006 Abstracts » PORTABLE VENTILATORS : A COMPARISON OF DURATION OF OPERATION FROM AN E-CYLINDER