A bench study of critical care ventilators: performance analysis

Abstract

Background: Global pandemic due to COVID-19 has increased the interest for ventilators´ use worldwide. New devices have been developed and older ones have undergone a renewed interest, but we lack robust evidence about performance of each ventilator to match appropriate device to a given patient and care environment.Methods: The aim of this bench study was to investigate the performance of six devices for noninvasive ventilation, and to compare them in terms of volume delivered, trigger response, pressurization capacity and synchronization in volume assisted controlled and pressure support ventilation. All ventilators were tested under thirty-six experimental conditions by using the lung model ASL5000® (IngMar Medical, Pittsburgh, PA). Two leaks levels, two muscle inspiratory efforts and three mechanical patterns were combined for simulation. Trigger function was assessed by measurement of trigger-delay time. Pressurization capacity was evaluated as the net area under the pressure-time curve over the first 500 ms after inspiratory effort onset. Synchronization was evaluated by the asynchrony index and by the incidence and type of asynchronies in each condition. Results: All ventilators showed a good performance, even if pressurization capacity was worse than expected. Leak level did not affect their function. Differences were found during low muscle effort and obstructive pattern. In general, Philips EV300 and Hamilton C3 showed the best results.Conclusions: NIV devices successfully compensate air leaks but still underperform with low muscle effort and obstructive lungs. Clinicians´ must have a clear understanding of the goals of NIV both for devices´ choice and set main parameters to achieve therapy success.