Heat and Moisture Exchangers (HMEs) vs Heated Humidifiers (HHs) in the Management of Mechanical Ventilated Adult Patients

INTRODUCTION: Patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), their body's natural mechanisms for conditioning inspired air such as filtration, warming/humidification gets disrupted. The endotracheal tube (ETT) bypasses these processes, leaving the inspired gases unconditioned. Although NIV may aid in the upper airways, it often fails to provide sufficient humidification, primarily due to high flow rates needed to compensate for air leaks, but this can impair mucociliary function, degrade secretion quality, and compromise gas exchange balance. To mitigate these effects, various external devices designed for humidification, heating, and filtration have been introduced, though the evidence supporting their effectiveness varies.(1,2) OBJECTIVES: to compare parameters such as complete/partial block of airways, VAP, respiratory event related mortality, Cost in mechanically ventilated patients using heated humidifier vs hme filter. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 30 patients requiring mechanical ventilation in MICU were randomised into hh group (15) and HME group (15) and parameters such as complete/partial block of airways, VAP, respiratory event related mortality, Cost are assessed in a tertiary care hospital during the period of september 1(st) 2024 to december 31(st) 2024. RESULTS: statistical analysis is being done and results will be presented in the final submission. DISCUSSIONS/CONCLUSIONS: statistical analysis is being done and results will be presented in the final submission.