Abstract
BACKGROUND: This aim of study was to introduce a diaphragm-based EIT-belt placement method based on diaphragm position by ultrasound, and to evaluate the difference between diaphragm-based EIT-belt placement and conventional EIT-belt placement. METHOD: The diaphragm position (L(0)) determined by ultrasound was taken as zero reference level. The direction of headward is defined as positive, and toward feet is negative. For EIT data collection, the electrode belt was placed at 7 different levels, respectively (denoted as L(-2 cm), L(0), L(2cm), L(4cm), L(6cm), L(8cm), L(10cm)) at supine position in healthy volunteers. The diaphragm-based EIT-belt level (L(xcm)) was defined where highest tidal impedance variation (TV) was achieved. Subsequently, EIT measurements were conducted at diaphragm-based EIT-belt levels and traditional EIT-belt level in 50 critically ill patients under mechanical ventilation. RESULT: The highest TV was achieved at L(6cm) and the smallest at L(-2 cm)., so the L(6cm) were taken as diaphragm-based EIT-belt level by ultrasound in 8 healthy volunteers. In 23 patients, the diaphragm-based EIT-belt plane agreed with the conventional planes (4th-6th ICS), which was defined as the Agreed group. Other patients were classified to the Disagreed group (above 4th ICS). The Disagreed group has a significantly higher BMI and lower global TV at the diaphragm-based EIT-belt plane compared to the Agreed group. CONCLUSIONS: The diaphragm-based EIT-belt position by ultrasound was feasible and resulted in different belt positions compared to the conventional position in > 50% of the examined subjects, especially in patients with higher BMI. Further study is required to validate the impact on EIT images with this novel method on clinical management.