4.5 Article

Inspiratory response and side-effects to rapid bilateral magnetic phrenic nerve stimulation using differently shaped coils: implications for stimulation-assisted mechanical ventilation

期刊

RESPIRATORY RESEARCH
卷 23, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12931-022-02251-y

关键词

Phrenic nerves; Magnetic stimulation; Diaphragm; Mechanical ventilation; Non-invasive ventilation

资金

  1. Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich Innosuisse
  2. [34221.1 IP-LS]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rapid magnetic stimulation can attenuate diaphragm atrophy during mechanical ventilation. This study compared the effectiveness and side effects of three different magnetic stimulation coils when used on the neck or chest, and found that RMSBAMPS was more effective than RMSaMS in temporarily ventilating humans.
Background: Rapid magnetic stimulation (RMS) of the phrenic nerves may serve to attenuate diaphragm atrophy during mechanical ventilation. With different coil shapes and stimulation location, inspiratory responses and side-effects may differ. This study aimed to compare the inspiratory and sensory responses of three different RMS-coils either used bilaterally on the neck or on the chest, and to determine if ventilation over 10 min can be achieved without muscle fatigue and coils overheating. Methods: Healthy participants underwent bilateral anterior 1-s RMS on the neck (RMSBAMPS) (N = 14) with three different pairs of magnetic coils (parabolic, D-shape, butterfly) at 15, 20, 25 and 30 Hz stimulator-frequency and 20% stimulator-output with + 10% increments. The D-shape coil with individual optimal stimulation settings was then used to ventilate participants (N = 11) for up to 10 min. Anterior RMS on the chest (RMSaMS) (N = 8) was conducted on an optional visit. Airflow was assessed via pneumotach and transdiaphragmatic pressure via oesophageal and gastric balloon catheters. Perception of air hunger, pain, discomfort and paresthesia were measured with a numerical scale. Results: Inspiration was induced via RMSBAMPS in 86% of participants with all coils and via RMSaMS in only one participant with the parabolic coil. All coils produced similar inspiratory and sensory responses during RMSBAMPS with the butterfly coil needing higher stimulator-output, which resulted in significantly larger discomfort ratings at maximal inspiratory responses. Ten of 11 participants achieved 10 min of ventilation without decreases in minute ventilation (15.7 +/- 4.6 L/min). Conclusions: RMSBAMPS was more effective than RMSaMS, and could temporarily ventilate humans seemingly without development of muscular fatigue.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据