Journal of veterinary internal medicine · 2024
Use of prototype bi-nasal prongs for noninvasive ventilation in foals.
СтатьяRandomized Controlled Trial, VeterinaryНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Raidal Sharanne L, van Diggelen Michael, Catanchin Chee Sum M, Lehmann Heidi S, Quinn Chris T
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) provides effective respiratory support in foals, but face masks are poorly tolerated and associated with hypercapnia. Bi-nasal prongs might be a more effective device interface in foals.
OBJECTIVES: To compare bi-nasal prongs and masks for NIV in foals with pharmacologically induced respiratory insufficiency.
ANIMALS: Six healthy foals.
METHODS: In a randomized cross-over study, sedated foals received NIV delivered by mask or bi-nasal prongs, with the treatment repeated using the alternative device interface after a 3-day rest period. After periods of spontaneous ventilation through the allocated interface, with and without supplementary O2 (T2-T3), foals were subject to 10-minute treatment periods of NIV at different pressure support (5 or 10 cmH2O) and end-expiratory pressure settings (5 or 10 cmH2O), with and without supplementary O2 (T4-T7). Vital signs, arterial blood gases, spirometry, and gas exchange data were measured in the final 2 minutes of each treatment window.
RESULTS: Bi-nasal prongs were well tolerated and required less manual positioning or monitoring compared to the mask. Partial pressure of carbon dioxide did not increase during NIV with bi-nasal prongs and was lower than observed with masks (mean difference, 8.2 mmHg [95% confidence interval, 4.1-12.2 mmHg] at T6). Oxygenation and respiratory mechanics were improved in all foals and not different between device interfaces.
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Nasal prongs were well tolerated, had similar effects on respiratory function, and appeared to ameliorate hypercapnia observed previously during NIV in foals.
OBJECTIVES: To compare bi-nasal prongs and masks for NIV in foals with pharmacologically induced respiratory insufficiency.
ANIMALS: Six healthy foals.
METHODS: In a randomized cross-over study, sedated foals received NIV delivered by mask or bi-nasal prongs, with the treatment repeated using the alternative device interface after a 3-day rest period. After periods of spontaneous ventilation through the allocated interface, with and without supplementary O2 (T2-T3), foals were subject to 10-minute treatment periods of NIV at different pressure support (5 or 10 cmH2O) and end-expiratory pressure settings (5 or 10 cmH2O), with and without supplementary O2 (T4-T7). Vital signs, arterial blood gases, spirometry, and gas exchange data were measured in the final 2 minutes of each treatment window.
RESULTS: Bi-nasal prongs were well tolerated and required less manual positioning or monitoring compared to the mask. Partial pressure of carbon dioxide did not increase during NIV with bi-nasal prongs and was lower than observed with masks (mean difference, 8.2 mmHg [95% confidence interval, 4.1-12.2 mmHg] at T6). Oxygenation and respiratory mechanics were improved in all foals and not different between device interfaces.
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Nasal prongs were well tolerated, had similar effects on respiratory function, and appeared to ameliorate hypercapnia observed previously during NIV in foals.