Nagano, Osamu

In modern emergency and critical care, physicians tend to choose the mode of mechanical ventilation based on spontaneous breathing for the purpose of promoting discharge of pulmonary secretion and preventing atelectasis in patients with acute respiratory insufficiency. However, we often observe "differences in recovery" among patients treated using the same PSV settings beyond "differences in individual characteristics." We evaluated the Pressure Support Ventilation (PSV) mode aiming to certify the difference among 7 representative mechanical ventilators using the Active Servo Lung 5000 (ASL5000) respiratory simulation system. The following parameters were measured: The time delay that resulted in the lowest inspiratory pressure from the point at which the ventilator recognized spontaneous breathing (TD), the lowest inspiratory airway pressure (cmH2O) generated prior to the initiation of PSV (DeltaPaw), the work of breathing while triggering required to achieve the lowest inspiratory negative pressure from the beginning of inspiratory support (WOBtrig), and the inspiratory work of breathing (WOBi). The mean TD of the Puritan-Bennett type 840 (PB840) was signifi cantly shorter than those of other ventilators (p0.01). The WOBtrig of the PB840 was significantly lower than those of others (p0.01). However, the WOBi values of the Servo-I and T-Bird were greater than the others, with the Evita series showing the smallest WOBi of the 7 ventilators tested. According to this simulation study using ASL 5000, we concluded that PB840 was the most rapid response ventilator, but the Evita series was the gentlest mechanical ventilator among 7 ventilators from the standpoint of the total work of breathing during the inspiration phase in the setting of PSV.