Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters

Database
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
BMC Biomed Eng ; 4(1): 2, 2022 Mar 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1741967

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic revealed a substantial and unmet need for low-cost, easily accessible mechanical ventilation strategies for use in medical resource-challenged areas. Internationally, several groups developed non-conventional COVID-19 era emergency ventilator strategies as a stopgap measure when conventional ventilators were unavailable. Here, we compared our FALCON emergency ventilator in a rabbit model and compared its safety and functionality to conventional mechanical ventilation. METHODS: New Zealand white rabbits (n = 5) received mechanical ventilation from both the FALCON and a conventional mechanical ventilator (Engström Carestation™) for 1 h each. Airflow and pressure, blood O2 saturation, end tidal CO2, and arterial blood gas measurements were measured. Additionally, gross and histological lung samples were compared to spontaneously breathing rabbits (n = 3) to assess signs of ventilator induced lung injury. RESULTS: All rabbits were successfully ventilated with the FALCON. At identical ventilator settings, tidal volumes, pressures, and respiratory rates were similar between both ventilators, but the inspiratory to expiratory ratio was lower using the FALCON. End tidal CO2 was significantly higher on the FALCON, and arterial blood gas measurements demonstrated lower arterial partial pressure of O2 at 30 min and higher arterial partial pressure of CO2 at 30 and 60 min using the FALCON. However, when ventilated at higher respiratory rates, we observed a stepwise decrease in end tidal CO2. Poincaré plot analysis demonstrated small but significant increases in short-term and long-term variation of peak inspiratory pressure generation from the FALCON. Wet to dry lung weight and lung injury scoring between the mechanically ventilated and spontaneously breathing rabbits were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Although conventional ventilators are always preferable outside of emergency use, the FALCON ventilator safely and effectively ventilated healthy rabbits without lung injury. Emergency ventilation using accessible and inexpensive strategies like the FALCON may be useful for communities with low access to medical resources and as a backup form of emergency ventilation.

2.
Front Physiol ; 12: 642353, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1175554

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed an immense, unmet and international need for available ventilators. Both clinical and engineering groups around the globe have responded through the development of "homemade" or do-it-yourself (DIY) ventilators. Several designs have been prototyped, tested, and shared over the internet. However, many open source DIY ventilators require extensive familiarity with microcontroller programming and electronics assembly, which many healthcare providers may lack. In light of this, we designed and bench tested a low-cost, pressure-controlled mechanical ventilator that is "plug and play" by design, where no end-user microcontroller programming is required. This Fast-AssembLy COVID-Nineteen (FALCON) emergency prototype ventilator can be rapidly assembled and could be readily modified and improved upon to potentially provide a ventilatory option when no other is present, especially in low- and middle-income countries. HYPOTHESIS: We anticipated that a minimal component prototype ventilator could be easily assembled that could reproduce pressure/flow waveforms and tidal volumes similar to a hospital grade ventilator (Engström CarestationTM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We benched-tested our prototype ventilator using an artificial test lung under 36 test conditions with varying respiratory rates, peak inspiratory pressures (PIP), positive end expiratory pressures (PEEP), and artificial lung compliances. Pressure and flow waveforms were recorded, and tidal volumes calculated with prototype ventilator performance compared to a hospital-grade ventilator (Engström CarestationTM) under identical test conditions. RESULTS: Pressure and flow waveforms produced by the prototype ventilator were highly similar to the CarestationTM. The ventilator generated consistent PIP/PEEP, with tidal volume ranges similar to the CarestationTM. The FALCON prototype was tested continuously for a 5-day period without failure or significant changes in delivered PIP/PEEP. CONCLUSION: The FALCON prototype ventilator is an inexpensive and easily-assembled "plug and play" emergency ventilator design. The FALCON ventilator is currently a non-certified prototype that, following further appropriate validation and testing, might eventually be used as a life-saving emergency device in extraordinary circumstances when more sophisticated forms of ventilation are unavailable.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL