Home > Journals > Minerva Anestesiologica > Past Issues > Minerva Anestesiologica 1998 March;64(3) > Minerva Anestesiologica 1998 March;64(3):75-81

CURRENT ISSUE
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Reprints

MINERVA ANESTESIOLOGICA

A Journal on Anesthesiology, Resuscitation, Analgesia and Intensive Care


Official Journal of the Italian Society of Anesthesiology, Analgesia, Resuscitation and Intensive Care
Indexed/Abstracted in: Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 2,623


eTOC

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLES  CRITICAL AND INTENSIVE THERAPYFREEfree


Minerva Anestesiologica 1998 March;64(3):75-81

Copyright © 1998 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Comparison of three different humidification systems during prolonged mechanical ventilation

Luchetti M. 1, Stuani A. 2, Castelli G. 2, Marrano G. 1

1 Azienda Ospedaliera «Fatebenefratelli e Oftalmico» - Milano, Servizio di Anestesia e Rianimazione; 2 Azienda Ospedaliera «Carlo Poma» - Mantova, Servizio di Anestesia e Rianimazione


FULL TEXT  


Back­ground. An effi­cient humid­ifi­ca­tion ­system is ­expected to main­tain ­fluid and ­easily drain­able ­airway secre­tions. ­This ­study ­aims to com­pare the effi­ciency and ­safety of ­three humid­ifi­ca­tion ­systems ­during pro­longed mechan­ical ven­ti­la­tion.
­Design. Two-­center, pros­pec­tive, ran­dom­ized ­study.
­Methods. 45 crit­i­cally ill ­patients under­going mechan­ical ven­ti­la­tion ­were ­included in the ­study and allo­cated to ­receive one of ­three humid­ifi­ca­tion tech­niques: 1) Ben­nett Cas­cade ­water-­bath humid­i­fier (Ben­nett ­group); 2) ­Fisher & ­Paykel ser­vo­con­trolled humid­i­fier (F & P ­group); 3) HME ­Hygrobac DAR (HME ­group). Clin­ical and experi­mental obser­va­tions ­were con­ducted for 3 to 7 con­sec­u­tive ­days and ­included: ­body T°, ­room T°, ­inspired gas T°, tra­cheal T°, rel­a­tive and abso­lute ­humidity, ­heat and ­water ­loss, ­airway secre­tion ­score, ­need for endo­tra­cheal ­saline instil­la­tion and inci­dence of ETT occlu­sion.
­Results. The HME ­group ­showed a ­lower tem­per­a­ture of ­inspired ­gases com­pared to the F & P ­group (p<0.05); it ­also ­showed a ­lower abso­lute ­humidity com­pared to ­both Ben­nett and F & P ­groups (p<0.05). A ­better ­airway secre­tion ­score was ­obtained in Ben­nett and F & P ­groups com­pared to the HME ­group (p<0.01).
Con­clu­sions. Pas­sive humid­ifi­ca­tion ­systems pro­vided low ­degrees of ­humidity and tem­per­a­ture and ­could not main­tain ­good secre­tions. ­Active ­systems ­appeared to sat­isfy the rec­om­mended stan­dards and to ­allow ­fluid and ­easily drain­able secre­tions.

top of page

Publication History

Cite this article as

Corresponding author e-mail