Phrenic nerve stimulation experiences: A single centre, controlled, prospective study

Abstract

Patients with central apnoea may use electro ventilation, provided their phrenic nerves and diaphragm muscles are normal. A tendency towards better survival has been found, and both an improved quality of life and facilitated nursing have been claimed with electro ventilation compared to mechanical ventilation. The high investment for the device may form a hurdle for fund providers like our hospital administration board. We, therefore, from our first patient onwards, collected clinically meaningful data in a special register of all patients using electro ventilation and their controls on mechanical ventilation. Since 1988 172 patients left our institution dependent on a respiratory device. Of these, all 48 patients with preserved phrenic nerves chose phrenic nerve stimulation. A patient on mechanical ventilation who agreed to participate was chosen as a control (n = 44). All patients were seen at least once a year. 90 patients suffered high tetraplegia, and 2 suffered central apnoea for other reasons. There is a tendency towards better survival, and there is a lower frequency of decubital ulcers (0.02) and respiratory tract infections (p0.000) with electro than with mechanical ventilation. The frequency of respiratory infections turned out to be a better measure of the quality of respiratory care than survival. The resulting decrease in the need for airway nursing, and the reduced incidence of respiratory infections repaid the high investment in electro ventilation within one year in our setting. Informed patients prefer electro to mechanical ventilation; fund providers might also agree with this preference.