Abstract

BackgroundThe global pandemic of novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has led to global shortages of ventilators and accessories. One solution to this problem is to split ventilators between multiple patients, which poses the difficulty of treating two patients with dissimilar ventilation needs. A proposed solution to this problem is the use of 3D-printed flow splitters and restrictors. There is little data available on the reliability of such devices and how the use of different 3D printing methods might affect their performance.MethodsWe performed flow resistance measurements on 30 different 3D-printed restrictor designs produced using a range of fused deposition modelling and stereolithography printers and materials, from consumer grade printers using polylactic acid filament to professional printers using surgical resin. We compared their performance to novel computational fluid dynamics models driven by empirical ventilator flow rate data. This indicates the ideal performance of a part that matches the computer model.ResultsThe 3D-printed restrictors varied considerably between printers and materials to a sufficient degree that would make them unsafe for clinical use without individual testing. This occurs because the interior surface of the restrictor is rough and has a reduced nominal average diameter when compared to the computer model. However, we have also shown that with careful calibration it is possible to tune the end-inspiratory (tidal) volume by titrating the inspiratory time on the ventilator.ConclusionsComputer simulations of differential multi patient ventilation indicate that the use of 3D-printed flow splitters is viable. However, in situ testing indicates that using 3D printers to produce flow restricting orifices is not recommended, as the flow resistance can deviate significantly from expected values depending on the type of printer used.Trial registrationNot applicable.

Highlights

  • The global pandemic of novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has led to global shortages of ventilators and accessories

  • The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and its associated disease COVID-19 has resulted in a surge of patients requiring mechanical ventilation in regions where demand for ventilators often exceeds supply

  • We have experimentally investigated the effect of 3D printer design and material on the resistance of a 3D-printed splitter and flow restrictor

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The global pandemic of novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has led to global shortages of ventilators and accessories. One solution to this problem is to split ventilators between multiple patients, which poses the difficulty of treating two patients with dissimilar ventilation needs. The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and its associated disease COVID-19 has resulted in a surge of patients requiring mechanical ventilation in regions where demand for ventilators often exceeds supply. A possible solution to this problem is to split ventilators between multiple patients [4] This approach was investigated in 2006 by Neyman et al through the use of readily available Briggs T-connectors and human lung simulators [5]. The concept has since been investigated in several studies [6, 7]

Objectives
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call