4.6 Article

Evaluation of the catheter positioning for neurally adjusted ventilatory assist

Journal

INTENSIVE CARE MEDICINE
Volume 35, Issue 10, Pages 1809-1814

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00134-009-1587-0

Keywords

Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA); Neural control; Electrical activation of the diaphragm (EAdi)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

During neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA) the ventilator is driven by the patients electrical activation of the diaphragm (EAdi), detected by a special esophageal catheter. A reliable positioning of the EAdi-catheter is mandatory to trace a representative EAdi signal. We aimed to determine whether a formula that is based on the measurement from nose to ear lobe to xiphoid process of the sternum (NEX distance) modified for EAdi-catheter placement (NEXmod) is sufficient for predicting the accurate catheter position. Twenty-six patients were enrolled in this study. The optimal EAdi-catheter position (OPT) was defined by: (1) stable EAdi signal, (2) electrical activity highlighted in central leads of the catheter positioning tool, and (3) absence of p-wave in distal lead. Afterwards NEXmod was calculated and compared to the OPT finding. At NEXmod the EAdi signal was suitable for running NAVA in 18 out of 25 patients (72%). NEXmod was identical with OPT in four patients (16%). NAVA was possible in all patients at OPT. Median OPT position was 2 cm caudal of the NEXmod ranging from 3 cm too cranial to a position 12 cm too caudal (P < 0.01). In one patient excluded from further analysis EAdi-catheter placement led to the diagnosis of bilateral injury of the phrenic nerves. EAdi-catheter placement based on the NEXmod formula allows running NAVA in about two-thirds of all patients. The additional tools provided are efficient and facilitate the correct positioning of the EAdi-catheter for neurally adjusted ventilatory assist.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available