Sebrechts T et al. Flow-controlled ventilation with the Evone ventilator and Tritube versus volume-controlled ventilation. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2021 Feb 1;38(2):209-211. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0000000000001326

In this randomized cross-over pilot study, FCV was compared to VCV in eight lung-healthy patients for 15 minutes of ventilation. Upon baseline ventilation with VCV, patients were either ventilated with FCV followed by VCV, or the other way round. Ventilation settings were chosen to be comparable between FCV and VCV, and recruitment maneuvers were performed before changing between modes. All patients were adequately ventilated, with respiratory and hemodynamic
parameter within normal range. While no significant difference in arterial oxygenation was detected, the authors report an improved CO2 removal during FCV while using a comparable minute volume, indicating a higher ventilation efficiency. Furthermore, they state that recruitment maneuvers may have masked intrinsic differences between the ventilation modes, and that more data in larger patient groups is needed to evaluate the effects of FCV compared to VCV.

Get back to Literature

SEE OUR PRODUCTS

  • Tritube
  • Cricath
  • Evone
  • Ventrain

BLOG/NEWS

  • Evone is the best thing ever (read more..)
  • Ventrain is the greatest thing (read more..)
  • etc
  • etc

LITERATURE

Lorem Ipsum is simply dummy text of the printing and typesetting industry. Lorem Ipsum has been the industry’s standard dummy text ever since the 1500s,

CONTACT US

Ventinova Medical
Meerenakkerplein 7
5652 BJ Eindhoven (NL)

T. +31 (0)40 7516020
E. info@ventinova.nl