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
. 2022 Dec;67(12):1508-1516.
doi: 10.4187/respcare.10173. Epub 2022 Aug 30.

Effects of Mechanical Insufflation-Exsufflation With Different Pressure Settings on Respiratory Mucus Displacement During Invasive Ventilation

Affiliations

Effects of Mechanical Insufflation-Exsufflation With Different Pressure Settings on Respiratory Mucus Displacement During Invasive Ventilation

Joan-Daniel Martí et al. Respir Care. 2022 Dec.

Abstract

Background: Mechanical insufflation-exsufflation (MI-E) has been proposed as a potential strategy to generate high expiratory flows and simulate cough in the critically ill. However, efficacy and safety of MI-E during invasive mechanical ventilation are still to be fully elucidated. This study in intubated and mechanically ventilated pigs aimed to evaluate the effects of 8 combinations of insufflation-exsufflation pressures during MI-E on mucus displacement, respiratory flows, as well as respiratory mechanics and hemodynamics.

Methods: Six healthy Landrace-Large White female pigs were orotracheally intubated, anesthetized, and invasively ventilated for up to 72 h. Eight combinations of insufflation-exsufflation pressures (+40/-40, +40/-50, +40/-60, +40/-70, +50/-40, +50/-50, +50/-60, +50/-70 cm H2O) were applied in a randomized order. The MI-E device was set to automatic mode, medium inspiratory flow, and an inspiratory-expiratory time 3 and 2 s, respectively, with a 1-s pause between cycles. We performed 4 series of 5 insufflation-exsufflation cycles for each combination of pressures. Velocity and direction of movement of a mucus simulant containing radio-opaque markers were assessed through sequential lateral fluoroscopic images of the trachea. We also evaluated respiratory flows, respiratory mechanics, and hemodynamics before, during, and after each combination of pressures.

Results: In 3 of the animals, experiments were conducted twice; and for the remaining 3, they were conducted once. In comparison to baseline mucus movement (2.85 ± 2.06 mm/min), all insufflation-exsufflation pressure combinations significantly increased mucus velocity (P = .01). Particularly, +40/-70 cm H2O was the most effective combination, increasing mucus movement velocity by up to 4.8-fold (P < .001). Insufflation pressure of +50 cm H2O resulted in higher peak inspiratory flows (P = .004) and inspiratory transpulmonary pressure (P < .001) than +40 cm H2O.

Conclusions: MI-E appeared to be an efficient strategy to improve mucus displacement during invasive ventilation, particularly when set at +40/-70 cm H2O. No safety concerns were identified although a transient significant increase of transpulmonary pressure was observed.

Keywords: ICU; mechanical insufflation-exsufflation; mechanical ventilation; mucus displacement; respiratory mechanics; respiratory physiotherapy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have disclosed no conflicts of interest.

Comment in

  • We Can Move Mucus: But Is That Enough?
    Ntoumenopoulos G. Ntoumenopoulos G. Respir Care. 2022 Dec;67(12):1637-1641. doi: 10.4187/respcare.10675. Respir Care. 2022. PMID: 36442989 No abstract available.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources