ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Responses of Bilevel Ventilators to Unintentional Leak: A Bench Study.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Residual Apnoea-Hypopnoea Index Measurement from Positive Airway Pressure Devices versus Home Polygraphy: A Method Comparison Study Using Real-World Data.Respiration; international review of thoracic diseases · 2026Article
- Bench evaluation of six non-invasive ventilation home ventilators: comparison with an ICU ventilator and unsupervised clustering.BMJ open respiratory research · 2025Article
- Modeling ventilation of patients with interstitial lung disease at rest and exercise: a bench study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2024Article
- Use of prototype bi-nasal prongs for noninvasive ventilation in foals.Journal of veterinary internal medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe impact of leaks has mainly been assessed in bench models using continuous leak patterns which did not reflect real-life leakage. We aimed to assess the impact of the pattern and intensity of unintentional leakage (UL) using several respiratory models.
methodsAn active artificial lung (ASL 5000) was connected to three bilevel-ventilators set in pressure mode; the experiments were carried out with three lung mechanics (COPD, OHS and NMD) with and without upper airway obstruction. Triggering delay, work of breathing, pressure rise time, inspiratory pressure, tidal volume, cycling delay and the asynchrony index were measured at 0, 6, 24 and 36 L/min of UL. We generated continuous and inspiratory UL.
resultsCompared to 0 L/min of UL, triggering delays were significantly higher with 36 L/min of UL (+27 ms) and pressure rise times were longer (+71 ms). Cycling delays increased from -4 [-250-169] ms to 150 [-173-207] ms at, respectively 0 L/min and 36 L/min of UL and work of breathing increased from 0.15 [0.12-0.29] J/L to 0.19 [0.16-0.36] J/L. Inspiratory leakage pattern significantly increased triggering delays (+35 ms) and cycling delays (+263 ms) but decreased delivered pressure (-0.94 cmH
conclusionsThe pattern of leakage impacted more the device performances than the magnitude of the leakage per se. Flow limitation negatively reduced all ventilator performances.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.