Heated Humidifier versus Heat-and-Moisture Exchanger During Positive Pressure Ventilation With a T-Piece Resuscitator in Rabbits.

BACKGROUND: There are many proven benefits of the use of conditioned gases in mechanically ventilated patients. In spite of this, its use in the delivery room is limited, perhaps because of known difficulties with heated humidifiers (HH); moreover, there is no evidence regarding the use of heat-and-moisture exchangers (HME) in a delivery room setting. We sought to asess the airway's absolute humidity level using three diferents strategies: HH, HME and unconditioned gases. METHODS: We conducted an experimental study in 12 intubated rabbits ventilated with a T-piece resuscitator. Absolute humidity levels in inspired gases were measured at baseline and at 5, 10, 15, and 20 min while using HH, HME, or no conditioning method (ie, unconditioned). The animals were initially randomized to one of the 3 interventions, and each animal underwent the other methods with at least 24 h between each test. RESULTS: There were no differences in vital signs at baseline or at the end of the procedures. Mean absolute humidity at the end of the tests was 38.2 ± 1.7 g/m3 for HH, 28.9 ± 4.7 g/m3 for HME, and 13.9 ± 5.1 g/m3 for unconditioned gas (P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: During ventilation with a T-piece resuscitator, the absolute humidity was the highest with HH. The absolute humidity with HME was lower, but it was still significantly more than that with unconditioned gas. Therefore, the use of a T-piece resuscitator with HME could be a good alternative to HH given that positive-pressure ventilation is used ideally for short periods of time in the delivery room.