ArticleRespiratory care2024
Comparison of High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilators.
Article in Respiratory care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- High-frequency percussive ventilation in acute respiratory failure.ERJ open research · 2024Article
- Volume Targeting During High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation: What Should Clinicians Know.Respiratory care · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe performance of high-frequency oscillatory ventilators (HFOV) differs by the waveform generation mode and circuit characteristics. Few studies have described the performance of piston-type HFOV. The present study aimed to compare the amplitude required to reach the target high-frequency tidal volume ([Formula: see text]); determine the relationship between the settings and actual pressure in amplitude or mean airway pressure ([Formula: see text]); and describe the interaction among compliance, frequency, and endotracheal tube (ETT) inner diameter in 4 HFOV models, including Humming X, Vue (a piston type ventilator commonly used in Japan), VN500 (a diaphragm type), and SLE5000 (a reverse jet type).
methodsThe oscillatory ventilators were evaluated by using a 50-mL test lung with 0.5 and 1.0 mL/cm H
resultsTo achieve the target high-frequency [Formula: see text], the Humming X and Vue required a higher amplitude than did the SLE5000, but the maximum amplitude in the VN500 was unable to attain a larger high-frequency [Formula: see text]. Ventilator [Formula: see text] and alveolar pressure decreased at the Y-piece with the Humming X and Vue but increased with the SLE5000. The ventilator [Formula: see text] in the VN500 decreased remarkably at a frequency of 15 Hz. The ventilator amplitude in all 4 ventilators decreased while temporarily increasing at the Y-piece in the VN500.
conclusionsThe actual measured value, such as alveolar [Formula: see text] and high-frequency [Formula: see text], varied according to the type of HFOV system and the inner diameter of the ETT, even with identical settings. Clinicians should therefore determine the setting appropriate to each HFOV model.
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.