Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 May 31;9(1):26.
doi: 10.1186/s40635-021-00392-w.

Dynamic compliance in flow-controlled ventilation

Dietmar Enk  1 , Julia Abram  2 , Patrick Spraider  3 , Tom Barnes  4
Affiliations

Dynamic compliance in flow-controlled ventilation

Dietmar Enk et al. Intensive Care Med Exp. .
No abstract available

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

D. Enk: inventor of EVA and FCV technology (Ventrain, Tritube, Evone), royalties for EVA and FCV technology (Ventrain, Tritube, Evone), patent applications on minimizing dissipated energy and on calculating and displaying dissipated energy, (paid) consultant to Ventinova Medical. T. Barnes: patent application on calculating and displaying dissipated energy, (paid) consultant to Ventinova Medical.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Difference between monitored tracheal pressure and aggregate alveolar pressure in flow-controlled ventilation (FCV). For calculating the dynamic compliance, the aggregate alveolar driving pressure (ΔP) has to be determined first by correcting the measured tracheal ΔP for the pressure drop across the airway resistance. Averaged data provided in [1] are used. Depending on regionally different resistances, also regional alveolar ΔP and dynamic compliance may be different. Because the overall lung–chest system can only be studied from the outside as a single functional unit, the calculations necessarily represent aggregate estimates of the mechanical properties of the different compartments. The calculation is based on an I:E ratio of 1:1 (which is typical for FCV) and the assumption the measured resistance is entirely related to resistance in the airways. Hence tissue resistance is not considered, so the calculated pressure drop may be slightly overestimated and, in consequence, the aggregate alveolar ΔP somewhat underestimated
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Wittenstein J, Scharffenberg M, Ran X, et al. Comparative effects of flow- vs. volume-controlled one-lung ventilation on gas exchange and respiratory system mechanics in pigs. Intensive Care Med Exp. 2020;8(Suppl1):24. doi: 10.1186/s40635-020-00308-0. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Barnes T, van Asseldonk T, Enk D. Minimisation of dissipated energy in the airways during mechanical ventilation by using constant inspiratory and expiratory flows—flow-controlled ventilation (FCV) Med Hypotheses. 2018;121:167–176. doi: 10.1016/j.mehy.2018.09.038. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Barnes T, Enk D. Ventilation for low dissipated energy achieved using flow control during both inspiration and expiration. Trends Anaesth Crit Care. 2019;24(2):5–12. doi: 10.1016/j.tacc.2018.09.003. - DOI
    1. Spraider P, Martini J, Abram J, et al. Individualized flow-controlled ventilation compared to best clinical practice pressure-controlled ventilation: a prospective randomized porcine study. Crit Care. 2020;24(1):662. doi: 10.1186/s13054-020-03325-3. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources