BackgroundThe use of evaluation tools such as the manovacuometer and respirometer is frequent and disinfection is usually limited to the external surfaces, which is insufficient and raises concerns because of the potential spread of infectious diseases. Hydrophobic heat and moisture exchangers (HME) are used in mechanical ventilation and have microbiological filters, which can possibly reduce contamination, increasing the safety of related procedures. It is unknown, however, if the addition of an exchanger affects the measurements obtained. Aim of this study was to verify if the use of an HME interferes in maximal inspiratory and expiratory pressures assessed using the manovacuometer and vital capacity evaluated using the respirometer in healthy adults.MethodsA controlled transversal trial was carried out. Twenty healthy young adults were included in the study. Vital capacity by respirometer and, maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP) and maximal expiratory pressure (MEP) were assessed with and without the use of HME.ResultsNo significant difference was found between the values pre and post HME use in vital capacity measurements: (3878.8 ± 202.2 mL vs. 3925.5 ± 206.0 mL, p = 0.116) and the respiratory muscle strength measurements: MIP (−99.0 ± 8.9 vs −95.5 ± 9.0 cm H2O, p = 0.149) and MEP (92.5 ± 7.5 vs 92.5 ± 7.7 cm H2O, p = 1.0) respectively.ConclusionWe conclude that the use of HME does not modify the lung volumes or respiratory muscle strength, and can be used in order to reduce the occurrence of pulmonary infection.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the possible changes in tidal volume, minute volume and respiratory rate caused by the use of a heat and moisture exchanger in patients receiving pressure support mechanical ventilation and to quantify the variation in pressure support required to compensate for the effect caused by the heat and moisture exchanger.MethodsPatients under invasive mechanical ventilation in pressure support mode were evaluated using heated humidifiers and heat and moisture exchangers. If the volume found using the heat and moisture exchangers was lower than that found with the heated humidifier, an increase in pressure support was initiated during the use of the heat and moisture exchanger until a pressure support value was obtained that enabled the patient to generate a value close to the initial tidal volume obtained with the heated humidifier. The analysis was performed by means of the paired t test, and incremental values were expressed as percentages of increase required.ResultsA total of 26 patients were evaluated. The use of heat and moisture exchangers increased the respiratory rate and reduced the tidal and minute volumes compared with the use of the heated humidifier. Patients required a 38.13% increase in pressure support to maintain previous volumes when using the heat and moisture exchanger.ConclusionThe heat and moisture exchanger changed the tidal and minute volumes and respiratory rate parameters. Pressure support was increased to compensate for these changes.

COPD is characterized by persistent respiratory symptoms such as dyspnea, which contributes to decreased exercise tolerance. One of the main mechanisms involved is respiratory muscle dysfunction. (1) Therefore, changes in lung volumes and capacities, especially reduced VC, can be observed in patients with COPD, as can respiratory muscle weakness. (2) The measurement of VC and respiratory pressures (MIP and MEP) is performed using a spirometer ( Figure 1A) and a manometer ( Figure 1C), respectively. These devices are cleaned only externally, which may contribute to the increased incidence of infections, given that no device is utilized to filter the air inhaled and exhaled by patients during routine evaluations. (3) Therefore, a viable alternative would be to use heat and moisture exchangers (HMEs) on such equipment.A hydrophobic HME contains an inline, disposable, hygroscopic, bacteriostatic sponge (microbiological filter, Figures 1B and 1D) that reduces device contamination, thus protecting patients from microbial contamination. (4) Lucato et al. (5) demonstrated that the dead space volume and resistance caused by the addition of an HME did not change the VC or respiratory muscle strength values in volunteers evaluated during spontaneous breathing. To our knowledge, there have been no studies aimed at determining whether the addition of a microbiological filter has a relevant impact on those variables in patients with impaired pulmonary function. However, such studies are important because it has been reported that the use of an HME may lead to increased pulmonary resistance, (6) which can cause problems in patients with COPD.The objective of the present study was to determine whether the use of an HME with a microbiological filter alters maximal respiratory pressures or VC in patients with COPD.We conducted a cross-sectional study in which the start sequence of the evaluation (presence or absence of an HME) was randomized, including 16 patients with COPD undergoing treatment in the cardiopulmonary and metabolic rehabilitation sector of a teaching clinic. The mean FEV 1 in those patients was 36.01 ± 10.56% of the predicted value and the mean FEV 1 /FVC ratio was 54.29 ± 10.01% of the predicted value. The sample size was determined by convenience sampling, which explains the small number of patients and may be a limitation of the study. This study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Centro Universitário São Camilo (Ruling no. 2,075,696), and all participating patients gave written informed consent. The inclusion criteria were having a spirometry-confirmed diagnosis of COPD and having had no exacerbations in the last six months. Patients who had recently undergone thoracic or abdominal surgery were excluded, as were those presenting with facial deformities, cognitive impairment, myopathy, or acute middle ear infection.The VC, MIP, and MEP were evaluated with and without an HME (Lumiar Bacteriological Filter; Besmed Health Business Corp., New Taipei City, Taiwan), which is indicated for filtering ...

Background: The use of evaluation tools such as the manovacuometer and respirometer is frequent and disinfection is usually limited to the external surfaces, which is insufficient and raises concerns because of the potential spread of infectious diseases. Hydrophobic heat and moisture exchangers (HME) are used in mechanical ventilation and have microbiological filters, which can possibly reduce contamination, increasing the safety of related procedures. It is unknown, however, if the addition of an exchanger affects the measurements obtained. Aim of this study was to verify if the use of an HME interferes in maximal inspiratory and expiratory pressures assessed using the manovacuometer and vital capacity evaluated using the respirometer in healthy adults. Methods: A controlled transversal trial was carried out. Twenty healthy young adults were included in the study. Vital capacity by respirometer and, maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP) and maximal expiratory pressure (MEP) were assessed with and without the use of HME. Results: No significant difference was found between the values pre and post HME use in vital capacity measurements: (3878.8 ± 202.2 mL vs. 3925.5 ± 206.0 mL, p = 0.116) and the respiratory muscle strength measurements: MIP (−99.0 ± 8.9 vs −95.5 ± 9.0 cm H2O, p = 0.149) and MEP (92.5 ± 7.5 vs 92.5 ± 7.7 cm H2O, p = 1.0) respectively. Conclusion: We conclude that the use of HME does not modify the lung volumes or respiratory muscle strength, and can be used in order to reduce the occurrence of pulmonary infection.