Trends in Pediatric Patient-Ventilator Asynchrony During Invasive Mechanical Ventilation

An overview of patient-ventilator asynchrony in children

INTRODUCTION

Mechanically ventilated children often have patient-ventilator asynchrony (PVA). When a ventilated patient has spontaneous effort, the ventilator attempts to synchronize with the patient, but PVA represents a mismatch between patient respiratory effort and ventilator delivered breaths.

AREAS COVERED

This review will focus on subtypes of patient ventilator asynchrony, methods to detect or measure PVA, risk factors for and characteristics of patients with PVA subtypes, potential clinical implications, treatment or prevention strategies, and future areas for research. Throughout this review, we will provide pediatric specific considerations.

EXPERT OPINION

PVA in pediatric patients supported by mechanical ventilation occurs frequently and is understudied. Pediatric patients have unique physiologic and pathophysiologic characteristics which affect PVA. While recognition of PVA and its subtypes is important for bedside clinicians, the clinical implications and risks versus benefits of treatment targeted at reducing PVA remain unknown. Future research should focus on harmonizing PVA terminology, refinement of automated detection technologies, determining which forms of PVA are harmful, and development of PVA-specific ventilator interventions.

Detection and quantitative analysis of patient-ventilator interactions in ventilated infants by deep learning networks

BACKGROUND

The study of patient-ventilator interactions (PVI) in mechanically ventilated neonates is limited by the lack of unified PVI definitions and tools to perform large scale analyses.

METHODS

An observational study was conducted in 23 babies randomly selected from 170 neonates who were ventilated with SIPPV-VG, SIMV-VG or PSV-VG mode for at least 12 h. 500 breaths were randomly selected and manually annotated from each recording to train convolutional neural network (CNN) models for PVI classification.

RESULTS

The average asynchrony index (AI) over all recordings was 52.5%. The most frequently occurring PVIs included expiratory work (median: 28.4%, interquartile range: 23.2-40.2%), late cycling (7.6%, 2.8-10.2%), failed triggering (4.6%, 1.2-6.2%) and late triggering (4.4%, 2.8-7.4%). Approximately 25% of breaths with a PVI had two or more PVIs occurring simultaneously. Binary CNN classifiers were developed for PVIs affecting ≥1% of all breaths (n = 7) and they achieved F1 scores of >0.9 on the test set except for early triggering where it was 0.809.

CONCLUSIONS

PVIs occur frequently in neonates undergoing conventional mechanical ventilation with a significant proportion of breaths containing multiple PVIs. We have developed computational models for seven different PVIs to facilitate automated detection and further evaluation of their clinical significance in neonates.

IMPACT

The study of patient-ventilator interactions (PVI) in mechanically ventilated neonates is limited by the lack of unified PVI definitions and tools to perform large scale analyses. By adapting a recent taxonomy of PVI definitions in adults, we have manually annotated neonatal ventilator waveforms to determine prevalence and co-occurrence of neonatal PVIs. We have also developed binary deep learning classifiers for common PVIs to facilitate their automatic detection and quantification.