Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

High-frequency jet ventilation. A prospective randomized evaluation.

G C Carlon, W S Howland, C Ray

    Chest
    |November 1, 1983
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Computational hyperspectral light-sheet microscopy.

    Optics express·2022
    Same author

    A roadmap for metapopulation research.

    Ecology letters·2021
    Same author

    Laboratory evaluation of secondary causes of bone loss in Veterans with spinal cord injury and disorders.

    Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA·2019
    Same author

    Erratum: Who Will Fund Postgraduate Education after 1992?

    Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of London·2019
    Same author

    Ethics Committees and Medicines Regulations.

    Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of London·2019
    Same author

    Study for online range monitoring with the interaction vertex imaging method.

    Physics in medicine and biology·2017
    Same journal

    The effect of a two-day stay at high altitude (2500 m) on right ventricular afterload and oxygen delivery in patients with pulmonary vascular disease A randomized controlled crossover trial.

    Chest·2026
    Same journal

    A Comparative Study of Radiation Exposure in Conventional and Robotic Bronchoscopy.

    Chest·2026
    Same journal

    Independent Prognostic Contributions of Anti-Ro52 and Anti-MDA5 in Autoimmune-Associated Interstitial Lung Disease.

    Chest·2026
    Same journal

    Lung aeration and gas exchange in SGA or AGA infants with moderate-severe BPD: secondary analysis of the PATH-BPD study.

    Chest·2026
    Same journal

    Lung Cancer Incidence and Mortality after Negative Low-Dose CT Screening Results.

    Chest·2026
    Same journal

    Symptom prevalence and impact on lung cancer risk in the SUMMIT study.

    Chest·2026
    See all related articles

    High-frequency jet ventilation (HFJV) and volume-cycled ventilation (VCV) are safe mechanical ventilation methods. HFJV showed faster improvement in some patients but no overall survival benefit compared to VCV.

    Area of Science:

    • Critical Care Medicine
    • Respiratory Physiology
    • Mechanical Ventilation

    Background:

    • Mechanical ventilation is crucial for patients with respiratory failure.
    • Volume-cycled ventilation (VCV) and high-frequency jet ventilation (HFJV) are common modes.
    • Comparing their efficacy and safety is essential for optimizing patient care.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To compare the safety, reliability, and efficacy of VCV and HFJV in maintaining gas exchange.
    • To evaluate patient outcomes, including reaching ventilation endpoints and intensive care unit (ICU) stay.

    Main Methods:

    • A randomized trial involving 309 patients allocated to VCV (n=157) or HFJV (n=152).
    • Defined specific endpoints for each ventilation mode, focusing on oxygenation, ventilation, and hemodynamic stability.

    Related Experiment Videos

  • Assessed outcomes such as barotrauma, technical failures, and crossover success rates.

    • Main Results:

    • No technical failures or significant differences in barotrauma incidence (<5%) between VCV and HFJV.
    • A higher percentage of patients randomized to HFJV reached their mechanical ventilation endpoint.
    • Patients switched from VCV to HFJV improved more rapidly than those switched from HFJV to VCV.
    • No significant differences in survival or ICU length of stay were observed.

    Conclusions:

    • Both VCV and HFJV are safe and reliable mechanical ventilation methods.
    • HFJV facilitated reaching ventilation endpoints more effectively and allowed support with lower pressures and tidal volumes.
    • While HFJV demonstrated some advantages in specific patient subgroups, it did not offer overall clinical benefits over VCV in this study.