Effect of various neutrally adjusted ventilator assist (NAVA) gains on the relationship between diaphragmatic activity (Eadi max) and tidal volume

INTRODUCTION. Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist (NAVA) is an assisted ventilatorymode in which the ventilator is driven by the electrical activity of the diaphragm (Eadi).NAVAimproves patient-ventilator synchrony [1] but little is known about how to set the NAVA gaini.e., how to choose the ratio between Eadi and delivered pressure. The aim of the present studywas to assess the relationship between Eadi and tidal volume (Vt) at various NAVA gainsettings and to evaluate whether modifying the gain influenced this relationship in non-invasivelyventilated (NIV) patients.METHODS. Prospective interventional study comparing 3 values of NAVA gain during NIV(20 min each). NAVA100 was set by the clinician according to the manufacturer's recommendations.In NAVA50 and NAVA150 the gain was set as -50% and +50% of NAVA100gain respectively. Vt and maximal Eadi value (Eadi max) were recorded. The ratio Vt/Eadi wasthen assessed for each breath. 5-95% range (range 90) of Vt/Eadi was calculated for eachpatient at each NAVA gain setting. Vt/Eadi ratio has the advantage to give an objectiveassessment Vt/Eadi max relationship independently from the nature of this relationship. Asmaller Range90 indicates a better matching of Vt to Eadi max.RESULTS. 12 patients were included, 5 had obstructive pulmonary disease and 2 mixedobstructive and restrictive disease. For NAVA100, the median [IQR] Range 90 was 32[19-87]. For NAVA150 Range 90 was 37 [20-95] and for NAVA50 Range 90 was 33 [16-92].That means that globally NAVA100 allowed a better match between Eadi max and Vt thanNAVA50 and 150. However, by patient, NAVA100 had the lowest Range 90 value for only 4patients (33%), NAVA150 for 2 (17%) and NAVA50 for 6 (50%) patients, indicating thatNAVA100 was not the best NAVA gain for minimizing Range 90 in every patients.Comparing the lowest Range 90 value to the next lowest for each patient, showed that 3 patientshad differences of less than 10% (one each for NAVA50, NAVA100 and NAVA150). Theremainder had differences from 17 to 24%, indicating that most patients (9/12 or 75%) had aclear better match between Eadi and Vt for one specific NAVA gain.CONCLUSIONS. Different NAVA gains yielded markedly different ability to match Vt toEadi max. This approach could be a new way to determine optimalNAVAgain for each patientbut require further investigations.REFERENCE. Piquilloud L, et al. Intensive Care Med 2011;37:263-71