ArticleMedical gas research
Simulated ventilation of two patients with a single ventilator in a pandemic setting.
Article in Medical gas research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recent progress of 3D printed responsive scaffolds for bone repair: A review.Materials today. Bio · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Simultaneous ventilation of two patients may lead to hypoventilation in one patient and hyperinflation in the other patient. In a simulation of ventilation in two patients using artificial lungs, we voluntarily directed gas flow to one patient by using three-dimensional-printed Y-adapters and stenosis adapters during volume- and pressure-controlled ventilation in the first set up. We continuously modified the model using a special one-way valve on the flow-limited side and measured it in pressure-controlled ventilation with the flow sensor of the ventilator adjusted on both sides in a second and third setup. In the first setup, volume- or pressure-controlled ventilation resulted in comparable minute volumes in both lungs, even when one side was obstructed to 3 mm. In the second setup, with a 3-mm flow limitation, we had a minute ventilation of 9.4 ± 0.3 vs. 3.5 ± 0.1 L/min. In the third setup, ventilation with a 3-mm flow limitation resulted in minute ventilation of 7.2 ± 0.2 vs. 5.70 L/min at a compliance of 30 vs. 70 mL/mbar. It is possible to override the safety features of a modern intensive care ventilator and thus direct tidal volumes in different lung conditions to one lung using three-dimensional-printed flow limiters. While this ventilation setting was technically feasible in a bench model, it would be unstable, if not dangerous, in a clinical situation.
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.