Head and Neck Surgery

Water Uptake Performance of Hygroscopic Heat and Moisture Exchangers after 24-Hour Tracheostoma Application

Cindy van den Boer MD

Department of Head and Neck Oncology and Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Search for more papers by this author

Jonathan H. Vas Nunes MD,

Jonathan H. Vas Nunes MD

Department of Head and Neck Oncology and Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Search for more papers by this author

Sara H. Muller PhD,

Sara H. Muller PhD

Department of Clinical Physics and Instrumentation, The Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Search for more papers by this author

Vincent van der Noort PhD,

Vincent van der Noort PhD

Department of Biometrics, The Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Search for more papers by this author

Michiel W. M. van den Brekel MD, PhD,

Michiel W. M. van den Brekel MD, PhD

Department of Head and Neck Oncology and Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Institute of Phonetic Sciences (ACLC), University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Department of Oral-Maxillofacial Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Search for more papers by this author

Frans J. M. Hilgers MD, PhD,

Corresponding Author

Frans J. M. Hilgers MD, PhD

[email protected]

Department of Head and Neck Oncology and Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Institute of Phonetic Sciences (ACLC), University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Corresponding Author: Frans J. M. Hilgers, MD, PhD, Department of Head and Neck Oncology and Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author

Cindy van den Boer MD,

Cindy van den Boer MD

Department of Head and Neck Oncology and Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Search for more papers by this author

Jonathan H. Vas Nunes MD,

Jonathan H. Vas Nunes MD

Department of Head and Neck Oncology and Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Search for more papers by this author

Sara H. Muller PhD,

Sara H. Muller PhD

Department of Clinical Physics and Instrumentation, The Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Search for more papers by this author

Vincent van der Noort PhD,

Vincent van der Noort PhD

Department of Biometrics, The Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Search for more papers by this author

Michiel W. M. van den Brekel MD, PhD,

Michiel W. M. van den Brekel MD, PhD

Department of Head and Neck Oncology and Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Institute of Phonetic Sciences (ACLC), University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Department of Oral-Maxillofacial Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Search for more papers by this author

Frans J. M. Hilgers MD, PhD,

Corresponding Author

Frans J. M. Hilgers MD, PhD

[email protected]

Department of Head and Neck Oncology and Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Institute of Phonetic Sciences (ACLC), University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands

First published: 28 March 2014

https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599814527420

Citations: 1

Sponsorships or competing interests that may be relevant to content are disclosed at the end of this article.

Share a link

Email
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Reddit
Wechat

Abstract

Objective

After total laryngectomy, patients suffer from pulmonary complaints due to the shortcut of the upper airways that results in decreased warming and humidification of inspired air. Laryngectomized patients are advised to use a heat and moisture exchanger (HME) to optimize the inspired air. According to manufacturers’ guidelines, these medical devices should be replaced every 24 hours. The aim of this study is to determine whether HMEs still function after 24-hour tracheostoma application.

Study Design

Assessment of residual water uptake capacity of used HMEs by measuring the difference between wet and dry core weight.

Setting

Tertiary comprehensive cancer center.

Subjects and Methods

Three hygroscopic HME types were tested after use by laryngectomized patients in long-term follow-up. Water uptake of 41 used devices (including 10 prematurely replaced devices) was compared with that of control (unused) devices of the same type and with a control device with a relatively low performance.

Results

After 24 hours, the mean water uptake of the 3 device types had decreased compared with that of the control devices. For only one type was this difference significant. None of the used HMEs had a water uptake lower than that of the low-performing control device.

Conclusion

The water uptake capacity of hygroscopic HEMs is clinically acceptable although no longer optimal after 24-hour tracheostoma application. From a functional point of view, the guideline for daily device replacement is therefore justified.

Supporting Information

References

1Ackerstaff AH, Hilgers FJ, Aaronson NK, Schouwenburg PF, van Zandwijk N. [Physical and psychosocial sequelae of total larynx extirpation and the use of a heat and moisture exchanger]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 1990; 134: 2438–2442.
CASPubMedGoogle Scholar
2Hilgers FJ, Ackerstaff AH, Aaronson NK, Schouwenburg PF, van Zandwijk N. Physical and psychosocial consequences of total laryngectomy. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 1990; 15: 421–425.
10.1111/j.1365-2273.1990.tb00494.x
CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
3Ackerstaff AH, Fuller D, Irvin M, Maccracken E, Gaziano J, Stachowiak L. Multicenter study assessing effects of heat and moisture exchanger use on respiratory symptoms and voice quality in laryngectomized individuals. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2003; 129: 705–712.
10.1016/S0194-59980301595-X
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
4Bien S, Okla S, As-Brooks CJ, Ackerstaff AH. The effect of a heat and moisture exchanger (Provox HME) on pulmonary protection after total laryngectomy: a randomized controlled study. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2010; 267: 429–435.
10.1007/s00405-009-1018-4
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
5Hilgers FJ, Aaronson NK, Ackerstaff AH, Schouwenburg PF, van Zandwikj N. The influence of a heat and moisture exchanger (HME) on the respiratory symptoms after total laryngectomy. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 1991; 16: 152–156.
10.1111/j.1365-2273.1991.tb01966.x
CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
6Zuur JK, Muller SH, de Jongh FH, van Zandwijk N, Hilgers FJ. The physiological rationale of heat and moisture exchangers in post-laryngectomy pulmonary rehabilitation: a review. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2006; 263: 1–8.
10.1007/s00405-005-0969-3
CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
7Herranz J, Espino MA, Morado CO. Pulmonary rehabilitation after total laryngectomy: a randomized cross-over clinical trial comparing two different heat and moisture exchangers (HMEs). Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2013; 270: 2479–2484.
10.1007/s00405-013-2493-1
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
8Dassonville O, Merol JC, Bozec A, et al. Randomised, multi-centre study of the usefulness of the heat and moisture exchanger (Provox HME(R)) in laryngectomised patients. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2011; 268: 1647–1654.
10.1007/s00405-010-1474-x
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
9van den Boer C, Muller SH, Vincent AD, van den Brekel MW, Hilgers FJ. Ex vivo assessment and validation of water exchange performance of 23 heat and moisture exchangers for laryngectomized patients [published online November 12, 2013]. Respir Care.
Web of Science®Google Scholar
10Kramp B, Donat M, Dommerich S, Wilhelm Pau H, Podbielski A. Prospective controlled study of microbial colonization of the trachea in tracheotomized and laryngectomized patients with HME (heat and moisture exchanger). Acta Otolaryngol. 2009; 129: 1136–1144.
10.1080/00016480802572517
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
11 International Standards Organization. Anaesthetic and respiratory equipment—heat and moisture exchangers (HMEs) for humidifying respired gases in humans—part 1: HMEs for use with tracheostomized patients having minimal tidal volume of 250 ml (ISO 9360-2:2001). Geneva, Switzerland: International Standards Organization; 2001.
Google Scholar
12 International Standards Organization. Anaesthetic and respiratory equipment—heat and moisture exchangers (HMEs) for humidifying respired gases in humans—part 1: HMEs for use with minimal tidal volume of 250 ml (ISO 9360-1:2000). Geneva, Switzerland: International Standards Organization; 2000.
Google Scholar
13Scheenstra RJ, Muller SH, Vincent A, Sinaasappel M, Hilgers FJ. Influence of breathing resistance of heat and moisture exchangers on tracheal climate and breathing pattern in laryngectomized individuals. Head Neck. 2010; 32: 1069–1078.
10.1002/hed.21293
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
14van den Boer C, Muller SH, Vincent AD, Zuchner K, van den Brekel MW, Hilgers FJ. Ex vivo water exchange performance and short-term clinical feasibility assessment of newly developed heat and moisture exchangers for pulmonary rehabilitation after total laryngectomy. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2014; 271: 359–366.
10.1007/s00405-013-2528-7
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
15Zuur JK, Muller SH, de Jongh FH, et al. A newly developed tool for intra-tracheal temperature and humidity assessment in laryngectomized individuals: the Airway Climate Explorer (ACE). Med Biol Eng Comput. 2007; 45: 737–745.
10.1007/s11517-007-0217-7
CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
16van den Boer C, Muller SH, Vincent AD, Zuchner K, van den Brekel MW, Hilgers FJ. A novel, simplified ex vivo method for measuring water exchange performance of heat and moisture exchangers for tracheostomy application. Respir Care. 2013; 58: 1449–1458.
10.4187/respcare.02369
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
17Boisson C, Viviand X, Arnaud S, Thomachot L, Miliani Y, Martin C. Changing a hydrophobic heat and moisture exchanger after 48 hours rather than 24 hours: a clinical and microbiological evaluation. Intensive Care Med. 1999; 25: 1237–1243.
10.1007/s001340051051
CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
18Boyer A, Thiery G, Lasry S, et al. Long-term mechanical ventilation with hygroscopic heat and moisture exchangers used for 48 hours: a prospective clinical, hygrometric, and bacteriologic study. Crit Care Med. 2003; 31: 823–829.
10.1097/01.CCM.0000055382.87129.DD
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
19Davis KJr, Evans SL, Campbell RS, et al. Prolonged use of heat and moisture exchangers does not affect device efficiency or frequency rate of nosocomial pneumonia. Crit Care Med. 2000; 28: 1412–1418.
10.1097/00003246-200005000-00026
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
20Hubner NO, Daeschlein G, Lehmann C, et al. Microbiological safety and cost-effectiveness of weekly breathing circuit changes in combination with heat moisture exchange filters: a prospective longitudinal clinical survey. GMS Krankenhhyg Interdiszip. 2011; 6(1): Doc15.
PubMedGoogle Scholar
21Ricard JD, Le Miere E, Markowicz P, et al. Efficiency and safety of mechanical ventilation with a heat and moisture exchanger changed only once a week. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2000; 161: 104–109.
10.1164/ajrccm.161.1.9902062
CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
22Thomachot L, Boisson C, Arnaud S, Michelet P, Cambon S, Martin C. Changing heat and moisture exchangers after 96 hours rather than after 24 hours: a clinical and microbiological evaluation. Crit Care Med. 2000; 28: 714–720.
10.1097/00003246-200003000-00019
CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
23Djedaini K, Billiard M, Mier L, et al. Changing heat and moisture exchangers every 48 hours rather than 24 hours does not affect their efficacy and the incidence of nosocomial pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1995; 152: 1562–1569.
10.1164/ajrccm.152.5.7582295
CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
24Roustan JP, Kienlen J, Aubas P, Aubas S, du Cailar J. Comparison of hydrophobic heat and moisture exchangers with heated humidifier during prolonged mechanical ventilation. Intensive Care Med. 1992; 18: 97–100.
10.1007/BF01705040
CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
25Keck T, Durr J, Leiacker R, Rettinger G, Rozsasi A. Tracheal climate in laryngectomees after use of a heat and moisture exchanger. Laryngoscope. 2005; 115: 534–537.
10.1097/01.MLG.0000150417.51835.4F
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
26Scheenstra RJ, Muller SH, Vincent A, Hilgers FJ. Heat and moisture exchange capacity of the upper respiratory tract and the effect of tracheotomy breathing on endotracheal climate. Head Neck. 2011; 33: 117–124.
10.1002/hed.21408
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
27Zuur JK, Muller SH, Vincent A, Sinaasappel M, de Jongh FH, Hilgers FJ. Assessment of tracheal temperature and humidity in laryngectomized individuals and the influence of a heat and moisture exchanger on tracheal climate. Head Neck. 2008; 30: 1072–1082.
10.1002/hed.20835
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar

Volume150, Issue6

June 2014

Pages 999-1004

Water Uptake Performance of Hygroscopic Heat and Moisture Exchangers after 24-Hour Tracheostoma Application

Abstract

Objective

Study Design

Setting

Subjects and Methods

Results

Conclusion

Supporting Information

References

References

Information

About Wiley Online Library

Help & Support

Opportunities

Connect with Wiley

Water Uptake Performance of Hygroscopic Heat and Moisture Exchangers after 24-Hour Tracheostoma Application

Abstract

Objective

Study Design

Setting

Subjects and Methods

Results

Conclusion

Supporting Information

References

References

Related

Information