Download PDF
Am J Perinatol 2017; 34(14): 1405-1410
DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1603732
Original Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

A Self-Inflating Bag May Cause Hypocapnia in a Rabbit Model of Manual Ventilation Compared to the T-piece Resuscitator

Luciana B. Haddad
1   Department of Maternal and Child, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil
2   University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
,
Renata S. Mascaretti
3   Department of Pediatrics, Hospital Municipal Vila Santa Catarina, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil
,
Luciana A. P. A. Valle
1   Department of Maternal and Child, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil
,
Celso M. Rebello
1   Department of Maternal and Child, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil
2   University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

22 October 2016

04 May 2017

Publication Date:
14 June 2017 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Manual ventilation is a key aspect that determines the efficiency of neonatal resuscitation and may be performed by specialists using different equipment and professionals.

Objective To compare manual ventilation using T-piece resuscitator and self-inflating bag in an experimental model, with regard to gasometric and respiratory mechanical parameters.

Methods Adult rabbits were submitted to 10 minutes of ventilation with each device operated by three groups of volunteers: physicians, physiotherapists, and nurses. We measured respiratory mechanics throughout the study as well as blood gas before and after ventilation, and we compared professionals' performance on each device.

Results Compared with T-piece, animals ventilated with the self-inflating bag in the nurse group (n = 7) presented a greater minute volume (390 ± 108 vs. 766 ± 410 mL/min, p < 0.05) relative to the physiotherapist group (n = 7, 418 ± 192 vs. 886 ± 787 mL/min), and physician group (n = 7, 438 ± 206 vs. 705 ± 434 mL/min); similar results were found in the nurse, physiotherapist, and physician groups for respiratory alkalosis (7.40 ± 0.11 vs. 7.61 ± 0.02, p < 0.05; 7.37 ± 0.10 vs. 7.52 ± 0.23; and 7.36 ± 0.07 vs. 7.40 ± 0.18 mL/min, respectively), and hypocapnia (32.4 ± 6.9 vs. 23.4 ± 7.5 mm Hg, p < 0.05; 40.4 ± 10.8 vs. 28.0 ± 15.2 mm Hg; and 38.0 ± 13.8 vs. 42.6 ± 18.1 mm Hg, respectively).

Conclusion Self-inflating bag resulted in hypocapnia and respiratory alkalosis in the nurse group, and ventilation using a T-piece resulted in a lower tidal and minute volume.

Keywords

ventilation - positive-pressure ventilation - infant - newborn
 

  • References

  • 1 Perlman JM, Wyllie J, Kattwinkel J. , et al; Neonatal Resuscitation Chapter Collaborators. Part 7: neonatal resuscitation: 2015 international consensus on cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care science with treatment recommendations. Circulation 2015; 132 (16) (Suppl. 01) S204-S241
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Wyllie J, Bruinenberg J, Roehr CC, Rüdiger M, Trevisanuto D, Urlesberger B. European resuscitation council guidelines for resuscitation 2015: section 7. Resuscitation and support of transition of babies at birth. Resuscitation 2015; 95: 249-263
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Rebello CM. There is a need to review the concept of manual ventilation with self-inflating bags in newborn infants. Rev Paul Pediatr 2010; 28: 4 . Doi: 10.1590/S0103-05822010000100001
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Jobe AH, Ikegami M. Mechanisms initiating lung injury in the preterm. Early Hum Dev 1998; 53 (01) 81-94
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Schmölzer GM, Te Pas AB, Davis PG, Morley CJ. Reducing lung injury during neonatal resuscitation of preterm infants. J Pediatr 2008; 153 (06) 741-745
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Keszler M, Abubakar MK. Physiologic Principles. In: Goldsmith JP, Karotkin EH. , eds. Assisted Ventilation of the Neonate. 5th ed. St. Louis: Elsevier; 2011: 19-46
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Roehr CC, Kelm M, Fischer HS, Bührer C, Schmalisch G, Proquitté H. Manual ventilation devices in neonatal resuscitation: tidal volume and positive pressure-provision. Resuscitation 2010; 81 (02) 202-205
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Hernandez LA, Peevy KJ, Moise AA, Parker JC. Chest wall restriction limits high airway pressure-induced lung injury in young rabbits. J Appl Physiol (1985) 1989; 66 (05) 2364-2368
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 O'Donnell CP, Davis PG, Morley CJ. Positive pressure ventilation at neonatal resuscitation: review of equipment and international survey of practice. Acta Paediatr 2004; 93 (05) 583-588
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Thakur A, Saluja S, Modi M. , et al. T-piece or self inflating bag for positive pressure ventilation during delivery room resuscitation: an RCT. Resuscitation 2015; 90: 21-24
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Finer NN, Rich W, Craft A, Henderson C. Comparison of methods of bag and mask ventilation for neonatal resuscitation. Resuscitation 2001; 49 (03) 299-305
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Bassani MA, Mezzacappa Filho F, Coppo MRC, Marba S. Peak pressure and tidal volume are affected by how the neonatal self-inflating bag is handled. J Pediatr (Rio J) 2009; 85 (03) 217-222
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Tracy M, Shah D, Priyadarshi A, Hinder M. The effectiveness of ambu neonatal self-inflating bag to provide consistent positive end-expiratory pressure. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2016; 101 (05) F439-F443
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Wada K, Jobe AH, Ikegami M. Tidal volume effects on surfactant treatment responses with the initiation of ventilation in preterm lambs. J Appl Physiol (1985) 1997; 83 (04) 1054-1061
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Dreyfuss D, Basset G, Soler P, Saumon G. Intermittent positive-pressure hyperventilation with high inflation pressures produces pulmonary microvascular injury in rats. Am Rev Respir Dis 1985; 132 (04) 880-884
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Rebello CM, Lorenzetti R, Haddad LB. , et al. Influence of the equipment used for manual ventilation over the variability of respiratory mechanics in rabbits. Crit Care 2011; 15 (Suppl. 02) 38 . Doi: 10.1186/cc10186
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Dawson JA, Gerber A, Kamlin COF, Davis PG, Morley CJ. Providing PEEP during neonatal resuscitation: which device is best?. J Paediatr Child Health 2011; 47 (10) 698-703
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Hillman NH, Moss TJM, Kallapur SG. , et al. Brief, large tidal volume ventilation initiates lung injury and a systemic response in fetal sheep. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2007; 176 (06) 575-581
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Roehr CC, Kelm M, Proquitté H, Schmalisch G. Equipment and operator training denote manual ventilation performance in neonatal resuscitation. Am J Perinatol 2010; 27 (09) 753-758
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 McHale S, Thomas M, Hayden E, Bergin K, McCallion N, Molloy EJ. Variation in inspiratory time and tidal volume with T-piece neonatal resuscitator: association with operator experience and distraction. Resuscitation 2008; 79 (02) 230-233
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Kattwinkel J, Stewart C, Walsh B, Gurka M, Paget-Brown A. Responding to compliance changes in a lung model during manual ventilation: perhaps volume, rather than pressure, should be displayed. Pediatrics 2009; 123 (03) e465-e470
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Bennett S, Finer NN, Rich W, Vaucher Y. A comparison of three neonatal resuscitation devices. Resuscitation 2005; 67 (01) 113-118
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Hawkes CP, Ryan CA, Dempsey EM. Comparison of the T-piece resuscitator with other neonatal manual ventilation devices: a qualitative review. Resuscitation 2012; 83 (07) 797-802
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Jayaram A, Sima A, Barker G, Thacker LR. T-piece resuscitator versus self-inflating bag for preterm resuscitation: an institutional experience. Respir Care 2013; 58 (07) 1233-1236
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Szyld E, Aguilar A, Musante GA. , et al; Delivery Room Ventilation Devices Trial Group. Comparison of devices for newborn ventilation in the delivery room. J Pediatr 2014; 165 (02) 234-239.e3
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Michna J, Jobe AH, Ikegami M. Positive end-expiratory pressure preserves surfactant function in preterm lambs. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1999; 160 (02) 634-639
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Sandhar BK, Niblett DJ, Argiras EP, Dunnill MS, Sykes MK. Effects of positive end-expiratory pressure on hyaline membrane formation in a rabbit model of the neonatal respiratory distress syndrome. Intensive Care Med 1988; 14 (05) 538-546
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Jobe AH, Kramer BW, Moss TJ, Newnham JP, Ikegami M. Decreased indicators of lung injury with continuous positive expiratory pressure in preterm lambs. Pediatr Res 2002; 52 (03) 387-392
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Kazakos GM, Anagnostou T, Savvas I, Raptopoulos D, Psalla D, Kazakou IM. Use of the laryngeal mask airway in rabbits: placement and efficacy. Lab Anim (NY) 2007; 36 (04) 29-34
    PubMedGoogle Scholar