Abstract
Abstract Background Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist (NAVA) compared to Pressure Support Ventilation (PSV) improves patient-ventilator interactions in intensive care unit. No study has evaluated NAVA in patients with obesity. We aimed to assess the feasibility and safety of NAVA in patients with obesity, and to compare NAVA in patients with versus without obesity. Methods In this randomized cross-over study, all respiratory cycles during 1 h of mechanical ventilation from 10 patients with obesity and 11 without obesity were analyzed. Patients underwent 30 min of NAVA and 30 min of PSV in a random order. Flow, airway pressure and diaphragm electrical activity were continuously recorded. Arterial blood gases were obtained at baseline and at the end of each 30-min period. Patient-ventilator interactions were assessed with trigger delay, inspiratory time in excess, rate and type of dyssynchrony cycles. Variability of the ventilatory parameters was evaluated by the coefficient of variation (SD/mean). Results All patients concluded the study, with a total of 1790 ± 873 respiratory cycles analyzed per patient. In patients with obesity, NAVA versus PSV was associated with a significant reduction in trigger delay (0 [0–5] vs. 106 [34–125] ms, p < 0.05), inspiratory time in excess (96 [94–102] vs. 145 [137–202] ms, p < 0.01) and in ineffective efforts (0 [0-0.03] vs. 0.33 [0.23–0.37] events/min, p < 0.05). The global dyssynchrony index remained similar in both modes (2.2% [1.1–4.4] vs. 3.7% [2.4–5.6], p = 0.68). Compared to PSV, PaO2/FiO2 ratio significantly increased in NAVA, 238 mmHg [174–344] versus 207 mmHg [164–297], p < 0.05. The tidal volume was significantly lower during NAVA than during PSV, 6.7 mL/kg predicted body weight [5.9–7.1] versus 7.2 mL/kg [6.2–8.2], p < 0.05. Ventilatory variability was significantly higher with NAVA, 16% [11-21] versus 4% [2-4] in mean inspiratory airway pressure. These results were similar in patients without obesity and the obesity factor was never significant. No adverse event was observed in patients with and without obesity in both modes. Conclusion In patients with obesity, NAVA ventilation is feasible and safe, improves patient-ventilator interactions and oxygenation, with an increase ventilatory variability compared to PSV. The effects of NAVA are comparable in patients with and without obesity.