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
. 2024 Dec 25;14(1):41.
doi: 10.3390/jcm14010041.

Effects of Automated Versus Conventional Ventilation on Quality of Oxygenation-A Substudy of a Randomized Crossover Clinical Trial

Collaborators, Affiliations

Effects of Automated Versus Conventional Ventilation on Quality of Oxygenation-A Substudy of a Randomized Crossover Clinical Trial

Michela Botta et al. J Clin Med. .

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Attaining adequate oxygenation in critically ill patients undergoing invasive ventilation necessitates intense monitoring through pulse oximetry (SpO2) and frequent manual adjustments of ventilator settings like the fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) and the level of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP). Our aim was to compare the quality of oxygenation with the use of automated ventilation provided by INTELLiVENT-Adaptive Support Ventilation (ASV) vs. ventilation that is not automated, i.e., conventional pressure-controlled or pressure support ventilation. Methods: A substudy within a randomized crossover clinical trial in critically ill patients under invasive ventilation. The primary endpoint was the percentage of breaths in an optimal oxygenation zone, defined by predetermined levels of SpO2, FiO2, and PEEP. Secondary endpoints were the percentage of breaths in acceptable or critical oxygenation zones, the percentage of time spent in optimal, acceptable, and critical oxygenation zones, the number of manual interventions at the ventilator, and the number and duration of ventilator alarms related to oxygenation. Results: Of the 96 patients included in the parent study, 53 were eligible for this current subanalysis. Among them, 31 patients were randomized to start with automated ventilation, while 22 patients began with conventional ventilation. No significant differences were found in the percentage of breaths within the optimal zone between the two ventilation modes (median percentage of breaths during automated ventilation 19.4 [0.1-99.9]% vs. 25.3 [0.0-100.0]%; p = 0.963). Similarly, there were no differences in the percentage of breaths within the acceptable and critical zones, nor in the time spent in the three predefined oxygenation zones. Although the number of manual interventions was lower with automated ventilation, the number and duration of ventilator alarms were fewer with conventional ventilation. Conclusions: The quality of oxygenation with automated ventilation is not different from that with conventional ventilation. However, while automated ventilation comes with fewer manual interventions at the ventilator, it also comes with more ventilator alarms.

Keywords: automated ventilation; closed-loop ventilation; fraction of oxygen; intensive care; invasive ventilation; manual interventions; oxygenation; positive end-expiratory pressure; ventilator alarms; ventilator settings.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

L.B. received lecture fees from Hamilton Medical. M.S. was part-time employed as a team leader of Research and New Technologies at Hamilton Medical from January 2022 until January 2023. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
CONSORT flow diagram.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Cumulative distribution plots for SpO2, PEEP, and FiO2. The plots show the median variables with automated ventilation (light blue) and conventional ventilation (purple). Horizontal dotted lines represent 50% of the patients and vertical dotted lines represent median values for the conventional group. Abbreviations: SpO2, pulse oximetry; PEEP, positive end-expiratory pressure; FiO2, fraction of inspired oxygen.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Proportions of breaths in predefined zones of oxygenation. Percentages of breaths in the predefined zones are shown in bar plots, wherein the mean percentages of breath in the optimal, acceptable, and critical zones per crossover phase are shown for the oxygenation zones and for SpO2 and PEEP/FiO2 zones separately.

References

    1. Girardis M., Busani S., Damiani E., Donati A., Rinaldi L., Marudi A., Morelli A., Antonelli M., Singer M. Effect of Conservative vs Conventional Oxygen Therapy on Mortality Among Patients in an Intensive Care Unit: The Oxygen-ICU Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2016;316:1583–1589. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.11993. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Asfar P., Schortgen F., Boisramé-Helms J., Charpentier J., Guérot E., Megarbane B., Grimaldi D., Grelon F., Anguel N., Lasocki S., et al. HYPER2S Investigators; REVA research network. Hyperoxia and hypertonic saline in patients with septic shock (HYPERS2S): A two-by-two factorial, multicentre, randomised, clinical trial. Lancet Respir. Med. 2017;5:180–190. doi: 10.1016/S2213-2600(17)30046-2. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chu D.K., Kim L.H.-Y., Young P.J., Zamiri N., Almenawer S.A., Jaeschke R., Szczeklik W., Schünemann H.J., Neary J.D., Alhazzani W. Mortality and morbidity in acutely ill adults treated with liberal versus conservative oxygen therapy (IOTA): A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2018;391:1693–1705. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30479-3. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Singer M., Young P.J., Laffey J.G., Asfar P., Taccone F.S., Skrifvars M.B., Meyhoff C.S., Radermacher P. Dangers of hyperoxia. Crit. Care. 2021;25:440. doi: 10.1186/s13054-021-03815-y. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Arnal J.-M., Garnero A., Novotni D., Corno G., Donati S.-Y., Demory D., Quintana G., Ducros L., Laubscher T., Durand-Gasselin J. Closed loop ventilation mode in Intensive Care Unit: A randomized controlled clinical trial comparing the numbers of manual ventilator setting changes. Minerva Anestesiol. 2018;84:58–67. doi: 10.23736/S0375-9393.17.11963-2. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources