RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The current standard treatment for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), is characterized by a low adherence rate due to various factors including circuit-dependent carbon dioxide (CO2) rebreathing, which can exacerbated by disparate factors, such as low PAP, use of auto-titrating PAP or ramps. However, risk factors for rebreathing are often overlooked or poorly understood in clinical practice. Therefore, our objective was to evaluate the extent of rebreathing occurring with commonly used CPAP masks across varying PAPs, tidal volumes, and respiratory rates. METHODS: In a bench study, we assessed the rebreathing rate of nine masks interfacing a CPAP with a lung simulator providing different breathing respiratory rates (15 or 20 breaths/min) and tidal volumes (400, 500, 600, 700 and 750 mL). Additionally, a theoretical model was developed to describe the likelihood of CO2 rebreathing from four different masks at various breathing settings. RESULTS: Overall, all masks performed worse in situations characterized by low PAPs, high tidal volumes, and high respiratory rates. However, Dreamwear, Nuance, Siesta, Vitera, and particularly V2 masks exhibited greater susceptibility to rebreathing compared to F20, P10, Brevida, and Rio masks for the same variations of PAPs or ventilatory parameters. The mathematical model suggested that the risk of rebreathing for Rio, P10 and Nuance mask is negligible for respiratory rates of 10 breaths/min or below. CONCLUSIONS: Circuit-dependent CO2 rebreathing can be a common occurrence and warrants careful mask selection upon CPAP therapy initiation for optimal clinical outcomes.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Supplemental oxygen is designed to raise alveolar PO2 to facilitate diffusion into arterial blood. Oxygen is generally delivered by nasal cannula either by continuous or pulsatile flow. Battery-powered portable oxygen concentrators (POCs) facilitate ambulation in patients experiencing exertional hypoxemia. In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) clears these devices to be sold by physician prescription. Recently, however, lower-cost devices described as POCs have been advertised by online retailers. These devices lack FDA clearance and are obtained over the counter (OTC) without prescription. This study determined whether a selected group of OTC POCs have oxygen delivery characteristics suitable for use by hypoxemic patients. METHODS: A metabolic simulator, capable of simulating a range of metabolic rates and minute ventilations, determined effects of oxygen supplementation delivered by a variety of devices on alveolar PO2 . Devices tested included 3 OTC POCs, an FDA-cleared POC, and continuous-flow oxygen from a compressed oxygen cylinder. End-tidal PETO2 , a surrogate of alveolar PO2 , was determined at each of each device's flow settings at 3 metabolic rates. RESULTS: Continuous-flow tank oxygen yielded a linear PETO2 increase as flow increased, with progressively lower slope of increase for higher metabolic rate. The prescription POC device yielded similar PETO2 elevations, though with somewhat smaller elevations in pulse-dose operation. One OTC POC was only technically portable (no on-board battery); it provided only modest PETO2 elevation that failed to increase as flow setting was incremented. A second OTC POC produced only minimal PETO2 elevation. A third OTC POC, a pulsed-dose device, produced meaningful PETO2 increases, though not as great as the prescription device. CONCLUSIONS: Only one of 3 OTC POCs tested was potentially of use by patients requiring ambulatory oxygen. Physicians and respiratory therapists should inform patients requiring portable oxygen that OTC devices may not meet their oxygenation requirements.
