High-frequency percussive ventilation compared with conventional mechanical ventilation

Crit Care Med. 1989 Apr;17(4):364-6. doi: 10.1097/00003246-198904000-00013.

Abstract

In seven patients with severe respiratory distress, conventional mechanical ventilation and PEEP were used initially for respiratory support, which was changed to high-frequency percussive ventilation (HFPV) at the same level of airway pressure and FIO2. During both modes of ventilation, patients could breathe spontaneously via a low-threshold demand valve. With HFPV, PaO2 improved significantly (p less than .01) compared with PaO2 during conventional methods. Cardiac output was unaffected by the change to HFPV.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study

MeSH terms

  • Carbon Dioxide / blood
  • Cardiac Volume
  • High-Frequency Ventilation / methods*
  • Humans
  • Oxygen / blood
  • Positive-Pressure Respiration*
  • Respiratory Insufficiency / physiopathology
  • Respiratory Insufficiency / therapy*
  • Technology Assessment, Biomedical
  • Tidal Volume

Substances

  • Carbon Dioxide
  • Oxygen