Hydrogenology
Source-linked study record

Performance of unmodified mechanical ventilators with 2% hydrogen gas mixtures

Mancebo JG, Sack K, Nguyen R, Peng Y, Sosa S, Anders M, Roddy DJ, Kheir JN. · Respiratory Care. 2025;70(4):377–383.

PreclinicalOther formsPublished 2025Source checked
Study record, not medical adviceThis record reports what the source states. It is not medical advice and does not establish that molecular hydrogen is effective, safe or appropriate for any person.
Quick summary

Study at a glance

Evidence type

Preclinical

Population or model

Servo-i, Servo-u, Evita Infinity V500 and Babylog VN500 ventilators connected to a closed test-lung circuit; no living subjects.

Intervention and dose

Certified premixed 2% H₂/98% O₂ and 2% H₂/21% O₂/balance N₂ were attached to ventilator O₂ and air inlets. · Ventilators were tested across 25–500 mL tidal volumes and set FIO₂ 0.21–1.0; delivered H₂ measured 1.9–2.1%.

Duration

Repeated bench runs and pre-use checks; no treatment duration or patient exposure.

Reported result

Servo-i, Servo-u and Evita V500 stayed within the study's ±10% accuracy criterion for tidal volume/FIO₂ and passed checks. Babylog VN500 overdelivered volume by roughly two- to three-fold (average bias −89.2%) and consistently failed its neonatal flow-sensor check with H₂ mixtures, despite acceptable FIO₂ readings.

Main limitation

Bench volume-control testing only, specific ventilator models/software, no pressure-control/non-invasive/anesthesia systems and no animal/patient safety or efficacy. The authors state H₂ mixtures were not FDA-approved for human use at publication. NIH funded the work; authors disclosed no conflicts.

Evidence and classification

What kind of evidence is this?

Evidence type

Preclinical

Reported design

Bench test of four clinical mechanical-ventilator models using a simulated patient/test lung

Research topic

Critical care and ischemia-reperfusion

Administration form

Other forms

Information not yet classified

Some editorial classification fields are still pending. The source-reported outcomes and result are shown below; Hydrogenology does not infer a positive or negative signal from prose automatically.

Reported in the source

Methods

Population or model

Servo-i, Servo-u, Evita Infinity V500 and Babylog VN500 ventilators connected to a closed test-lung circuit; no living subjects.

Sample

Five replicates per tidal-volume/FIO₂ combination; pre-use checks repeated three times, with the Babylog failure replicated in three separate units.

Duration

Repeated bench runs and pre-use checks; no treatment duration or patient exposure.

Intervention

Certified premixed 2% H₂/98% O₂ and 2% H₂/21% O₂/balance N₂ were attached to ventilator O₂ and air inlets.

Hydrogen form

Low-concentration premixed H₂/O₂/N₂ gases — not Brown's gas; both contained 2% H₂ rather than a 2:1 H₂:O₂ electrolytic mixture.

Dose or H₂ specification

Ventilators were tested across 25–500 mL tidal volumes and set FIO₂ 0.21–1.0; delivered H₂ measured 1.9–2.1%.

Comparator

The same ventilators supplied by standard hospital wall air/O₂ without H₂.

Reported, not endorsed

Outcomes and reported result

Outcomes measured

Set-versus-delivered tidal volume and FIO₂, inspired H₂ concentration and pre-use-check errors.

Reported result

Servo-i, Servo-u and Evita V500 stayed within the study's ±10% accuracy criterion for tidal volume/FIO₂ and passed checks. Babylog VN500 overdelivered volume by roughly two- to three-fold (average bias −89.2%) and consistently failed its neonatal flow-sensor check with H₂ mixtures, despite acceptable FIO₂ readings.

Extraction completeness

The complete free PMC article, settings, table, supplementary-delivery result and disclosures were checked for both gas mixtures, variable flow, all four ventilators, positive and device-failure findings, regulatory cautions, funding and conflicts.

A reported association, difference or mechanism is not automatically a clinical benefit.

Interpretation limits

Limitations and applicability

Main methodological cautions

Bench volume-control testing only, specific ventilator models/software, no pressure-control/non-invasive/anesthesia systems and no animal/patient safety or efficacy. The authors state H₂ mixtures were not FDA-approved for human use at publication. NIH funded the work; authors disclosed no conflicts.

Applies directly to

Device-compatibility evidence for trial planning; it does not authorize H₂ ventilation or prove clinical benefit.

No single-study GRADE certainty rating is assigned. Read how records and evidence assessments are prepared.

Sources and status

Sources and record status

Identifiers

PMID: 39969918 · DOI: 10.4187/respcare.12371

Publisher access

Free full article in PubMed Central.

Extraction basis

Complete PMC article and PubMed metadata; full-text extraction checked 9 August 2026.

Last reviewed

10 August 2026

Help the next reader

Help people check the facts before they buy.

Hydrogenology keeps 665 source-checked records accessible without advertising or product promotion.

Support independent access
Help us correct the recordReport a discrepancy

Send the exact difference between this page and the linked source. The study reference is attached automatically.