Synchronized and proportional sub-diaphragmatic unloading in an animal model of respiratory distress

Background A sealed abdominal interface was positioned below the diaphragm (the “NeoVest”) to apply synchronized and proportional negative pressure ventilation (NPV) and was compared to positive pressure ventilation (PPV) using neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA). Both modes were controlled by the diaphragm electrical activity (Edi). Methods Eleven rabbits (mean weight 2.9 kg) were instrumented, tracheotomized, and ventilated with either NPV or PPV (sequentially) with different loads (resistive, dead space, acute lung injury). Assist with either PPV or NPV was titrated to reduce Edi by 50%. Results In order to achieve a 50% reduction in Edi, NPV required slightly more negative pressure (−8 to −12 cm H 2 O) than observed in PPV (+6 to +10 cm H 2 O). The efficiency of pressure transmission from the NeoVest into gastric pressure was 69.6% (range 61.3–77.4%). Swings in esophageal pressure were more negative during NPV than PPV, for all conditions, due to transmission of negative pressure. Transpulmonary pressure was lower during NPV. Transdiaphragmatic pressure swings were reduced similarly for PPV and NPV, suggesting equivalent unloading of the diaphragm. NPV did not affect hemodynamics. Conclusions It is feasible to apply NPV sub-diaphragmatically in synchrony and in proportion to Edi in an animal model of respiratory distress. Impact Negative pressure ventilation (NPV), for example, the “Iron Lung,” may offer advantages over positive pressure ventilation. In the present work, we describe the “NeoVest,” a system consisting of a sealed abdominal interface and a ventilator that applies NPV in synchrony and in proportion to the diaphragm electrical activity (Edi).