Laboratory evaluation of heat-and-moisture exchangers

Abstract

We conducted a laboratory study on six commercially available heat and moisture exchangers in order to determine and compare their water retaining efficiency and their contribution to airway resistance. The Gambro-Engström Edith Flex device was the most desirable of the six devices we evaluated in terms of its water retaining efficiency. The NMI Pneumoist 1 and the Siemens Servo Humidifier 153 units had good water retaining capacity but their higher airflow resistance need close monitoring, especially after prolonged clinical use. The Pall HME 15-22 and the Portex Humid-Vent 1 devices were also efficient in water retaining capacity. The Pall also demonstrated low airflow resistance and the minimum increase in airflow resistance after water immersion. The pathogen filtering capacity of the Pall should also be considered an additional advantage, especially in infected patients. The Terumo Breathaid device performed worst of all six devices, but it was still better than no HME at all.