» Articles » PMID: 1412117

Variability of Inspired Oxygen Concentration with Nasal Cannulas

Overview
Journal Thorax
Date 1992 Aug 1
PMID 1412117
Citations 34
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The likely values of inspired oxygen concentration (FIO2) of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease breathing via nasal cannulas have not been assessed previously.

Methods: Seven patients with chronic obstructive lung disease and seven healthy subjects were studied while breathing oxygen via nasal cannulas or fixed performance (Venturi) or uncontrolled (MC) oxygen masks. Breath to breath values of FIO2 were calculated by extrapolation from expired oxygen and carbon dioxide concentrations on the basis of the oxygen-carbon dioxide relationship and on the assumption of a respiratory exchange ratio (R) of 0.8.

Results: In both groups of subjects the average values of FIO2 with nasal cannulas at 1 and 2 l min-1 were of a similar order to those achieved with 24.5% and 28% Venturi masks, but variations within and between subjects in both groups breathing via nasal cannulas were considerable and similar to those found with MC masks. In the seven patients with chronic obstructive lung disease breathing via nasal cannulas at 2 l min-1 the average FIO2 varied from 23.7% to 34.9%.

Conclusions: "Typical" values of FIO2 quoted with nasal cannulas can mislead. The results confirm that this mode of oxygen delivery is unsatisfactory if precise control of inspired oxygen is desired.

Citing Articles

Basing intubation of acutely hypoxemic patients on physiologic principles.

Laghi F, Shaikh H, Caccani N Ann Intensive Care. 2024; 14(1):86.

PMID: 38864960 PMC: 11169311. DOI: 10.1186/s13613-024-01327-w.


High-Flow and Low-Flow Oxygen Delivery by Nasal Cannula Evaluated in Infant and Adult Airway Replicas.

Sabz M, Noga M, Finlay W, Rouhani H, Martin A Respir Care. 2024; 69(4):438-448.

PMID: 38443141 PMC: 11108111. DOI: 10.4187/respcare.11438.


FiO prediction formula during low flow oxygen therapy in an adult model: a bench study.

Duprez F, Mol B, Lesire B, Cotils M, Michotte J, Mashayekhi S J Clin Monit Comput. 2023; 38(2):455-461.

PMID: 38155340 DOI: 10.1007/s10877-023-01109-y.


Prognostic value of respiratory parameters for COVID-19 patients in the emergency department: results from the EC-COVID study.

Cassano G, Nattino G, Belotti M, Cortellaro F, Cosentini R, Ghilardi G Intern Emerg Med. 2023; 18(7):2075-2082.

PMID: 37338715 DOI: 10.1007/s11739-023-03324-6.


Oxygen as an Essential Medicine.

Mart M, Sendagire C, Ely E, Riviello E, Twagirumugabe T Crit Care Clin. 2022; 38(4):795-808.

PMID: 36162911 PMC: 9417445. DOI: 10.1016/j.ccc.2022.06.010.


References
1.
Bethune D, Collis J . An evaluation of oxygen therapy equipment. Experimental study of various devices on the human subject. Thorax. 1967; 22(3):221-5. PMC: 471607. DOI: 10.1136/thx.22.3.221. View

2.
Green I . Choice of method for administration of oxygen. Br Med J. 2010; 3(5565):593-6. PMC: 1842745. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.3.5565.593. View

3.
Campbell E . Respiratory failure: the relation between oxygen concentrations of inspired air and arterial blood. Lancet. 1960; 2(7140):10-1. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(60)92659-3. View

4.
Gibson R, Comer P, Beckham R, McGraw C . Actual tracheal oxygen concentrations with commonly used oxygen equipment. Anesthesiology. 1976; 44(1):71-3. DOI: 10.1097/00000542-197601000-00019. View

5.
Leigh J . Variation in performance of oxygen therapy devices. Anaesthesia. 1970; 25(2):210-22. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.1970.tb00192.x. View