A translational study evaluating a ruggedized portable oxygen concentrator versus an oxygen cylinder in simulated polytrauma intubation of swine

Author:

Nowadly Craig123ORCID,Shepard Nola2,Silverman Montane1,Rall Jason2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Emergency Medicine Brooke Army Medical Center Fort Sam Houston Texas USA

2. Office of the Chief Scientist, 59th Medical Wing, Lackland Air Force Base Texas USA

3. Department of Military and Emergency Medicine Uniformed Services University Bethesda Maryland USA

Abstract

AbstractObjectivesPortable oxygen concentrators (POCs) are medical devices that use filters to selectively remove nitrogen from ambient air to produce concentrated, medical‐grade oxygen. This is the first study to evaluate a ruggedized POC's performance during simulated polytrauma intubation.MethodsTwenty‐seven swine were intubated and anesthetized with ketamine. At T = 0, animals were extubated, received a chest wall injury, a tibia fracture, and 20% total blood volume controlled hemorrhage was initiated. At T = 10 min, the swine were pre‐oxygenated using a bag‐valve mask connected to one of three randomized oxygen sources: (1) a ruggedized POC, (2) a M‐15 oxygen cylinder, or (3) room air (control). At T = 12 min, animals were re‐intubated to simulate polytrauma intubation and connected to the test oxygen source for the remainder of the experiment. Surviving animals entered a 2‐h period where partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), oxygen saturation (SpO2), and regional oxygen saturation (rSO2) were monitored. Groups were compared using analysis of variance (ANOVA), Fisher's exact, log‐rank analysis, or mixed‐effects model as appropriate.ResultsAll animals survived except one in the POC group. Mixed‐effects models revealed differences between groups with regards to PaO2 (p < 0.0001) and SpO2 (p = 0.006). Based on post hoc analysis, oxygen cylinder PaO2 was superior to both POC and control, but there were no differences between POC and control PaO2. There were statistically and clinically significant differences in SpO2 during periods of pre‐oxygenation (T = 10‒12 min), intubation (T = 12‒14 min), and immediately after intubation (T = 14‒20 min). The POC battery was consumed in 43 ± 13 min.ConclusionIn our swine model, a single, ruggedized POC provided inferior amounts of oxygen supplementation compared to an oxygen cylinder and performed no better than room air.

Publisher

Wiley

Reference14 articles.

1. Prognostic Value of Secondary Insults in Traumatic Brain Injury: Results from The IMPACT Study

2. Joint Trauma System.TCCC Guidelines. Published online December 15 2021.

3. The Use of Portable Oxygen Concentrators in Low-Resource Settings: A Systematic Review

4. Oxygen concentrators and cylinders;Dobson MB;Int J Tuberc Lung Dis,2001

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3