Efficacy of Mechanical Insufflation-Exsufflation Devices as Analyzed in Lung Models: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Peak Expiratory Flow Data
Restricted accessReview articleFirst published online 2026
Efficacy of Mechanical Insufflation-Exsufflation Devices as Analyzed in Lung Models: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Peak Expiratory Flow Data
Mechanical insufflation-exsufflation (MI-E) devices support airway clearance by generating positive and negative pressure cycles that simulate a cough. Bench studies using lung models provide a controlled environment to investigate device performance and optimize settings; however, the lack of methodological standardization limits reproducibility and clinical translation.
Methods:
A systematic review and network meta-analysis were conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) (CRD42023486537). Experimental studies using adult mechanical lung models were identified from MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science (search updated November 2024). Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality using a customized risk-of-bias tool specifically developed for bench studies of respiratory devices. The primary outcome was peak expiratory flow (PEF); secondary outcomes included insufflation and exsufflation parameters. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed.
Results:
Eleven studies (2002–2024) met the inclusion criteria, encompassing 6 MI-E devices and a range of simulated lung mechanics. The most frequently used settings were +40/−40 cm H2O with 3-s insufflation, 1-s exsufflation, and 1-s pause. Higher pressure pairs (+50/−50 cm H2O) produced significantly greater PEF compared with lower pressures, particularly in obstructive models (mean difference = 134 L/min, 95% CI 2–267). Methodological quality varied widely, with limited information on calibration, sensor characteristics, and study reproducibility.
Conclusions:
Higher pressure differentials generally enhance PEF, but optimal MI-E settings are not universal. MI-E performance depends on pressure settings and simulated respiratory mechanics. Clinically, these findings support individualized adjustment of MI-E parameters based on patient-specific characteristics. The lack of methodological standardization and calibration reporting limits comparability. A structured protocol for MI-E bench studies is proposed to enhance reproducibility, transparency, and translational relevance.
McCoolFD and LeithDE. Pathophysiology of cough. Clin Chest Med1987; 8: 189–195; doi: 3621873
2.
McGarveyL, RubinBK, EbiharaS, et al.Global physiology and pathophysiology of cough: Part 2. Demographic and clinical considerations: CHEST Expert Panel report. Chest2021; doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2021.04.039
3.
BachJR. Mechanical insufflation-exsufflation: Comparison of peak expiratory flows with manually assisted and unassisted coughing techniques. Chest1993; 104: 1553–1562; doi: 10.1378/chest.104.5.1553
4.
ChatwinM, RossE, HartN, et al.Cough augmentation with mechanical insufflation/exsufflation in patients with neuromuscular weakness. Eur Respir J2003; 21: 502–508; doi: 10.1183/09031936.03.00048102
5.
MartíJ-D, Martínez-AlejosR, Pilar-DiazX, et al.Effects of mechanical insufflation-exsufflation with different pressure settings on respiratory mucus displacement during invasive ventilation. Respir Care2022; 67: 1508–1516; doi: 10.4187/respcare.10173
6.
Martínez-AlejosR, MartíJ-D, BassiGL, et al.Effects of mechanical insufflation-exsufflation on sputum volume in mechanically ventilated critically ill subjects. Respir Care2021; 66: 1371–1379; doi: 10.4187/respcare.08641
7.
ChatwinM. Mechanical aids for secretion clearance. Int J Respir Care2009; 5: 50–53.
8.
GonçalvesMR, HonradoT, WinckJC, et al.Effects of mechanical insufflation-exsufflation in preventing respiratory failure after extubation: a randomized controlled trial. Crit Care2012; 16: R48; doi: 10.1186/cc11249
9.
KhanA, Frazer-GreenL, AminR, et al.Respiratory management of patients with neuromuscular weakness: an American college of chest physicians clinical practice guideline and expert panel report. Chest2023; 164: 394–413; doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2023.03.011
10.
ShoesmithC, AbrahaoA, BensteadT, et al.Canadian best practice recommendations for the management of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. CMAJ2020; 192: E1453–E1468; doi: 10.1503/cmaj.191721
11.
SwingwoodE, TumeL and CrampF. A survey examining the use of mechanical insufflation-exsufflation on adult intensive care units across the UK. J Intensive Care Soc2020; 21: 283–289; doi: 10.1177/1751143719870121
12.
HovB, AndersenT, ToussaintM, et al.User-perceived impact of long-term mechanical assisted cough in paediatric neurodisability. Dev Med Child Neurol2023; 65: 655–663; doi: 10.1111/dmcn.15543
13.
ToussaintM, ChatwinM, GonzalesJ, ENMC Respiratory Therapy Consortium. et al.; 228th ENMC international workshop: airway clearance techniques in neuromuscular disorders Naarden, The Netherlands, 3-5 Mar, 2017. Neuromuscul Disord2018; 28: 289–298; doi: 10.1016/j.nmd.2017.10.008
14.
ChatwinM and WakemanRH. Mechanical insufflation-exsufflation: considerations for improving clinical practice. J Clin Med2023; 12: 2626; doi: 10.3390/jcm12072626
15.
BachJR. Update and perspective on noninvasive respiratory muscle aids: Part 2: the expiratory aids. Chest1994; 105: 1538–1544; doi: 10.1378/chest.105.5.1538
16.
Gomez-MerinoE, SanchoJ, MarinJ, et al.Mechanical insufflation-exsufflation: pressure, volume, and flow relationships and the adequacy of the manufacturer’s guidelines. Am J Phys Med Rehabil2002; 81: 579–583; doi: 10.1097/00002060-200208000-00004
17.
SanchoJ, ServeraE, MarínJ, et al.Effect of lung mechanics on mechanically assisted flows and volumes. Am J Phys Med Rehabil2004; 83: 698–703; doi: 10.1097/01.phm.0000137309.34404.bc
18.
SanchoJ, ServeraE, BañulsP, et al.Effectiveness of assisted and unassisted cough capacity in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis patients. Amyotroph Lateral Scler Frontotemporal Degener2017; 18: 498–504; doi: 10.1080/21678421.2017.1335324
19.
AndersenT, SandnesA, BrekkaAK, et al.Laryngeal response patterns influence the efficacy of mechanical assisted cough in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Thorax2017; 72: 221–229; doi: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2015-207555
20.
VolpeMS, NavesJM, RibeiroGG, et al.Airway clearance with an optimized mechanical insufflation-exsufflation maneuver. Respir Care2018; 63: 1214–1222; doi: 10.4187/respcare.05965
21.
LacombeM, BoréA, Amo CastrilloLD, et al.Peak cough flow fails to detect upper airway collapse during negative pressure titration for cough-assist. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2019; 100: 2346–2353; doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2019.06.012
22.
AndersenT, HovB, FondenesO, et al.Laryngeal responses and airflow geometry in ALS during mechanically assisted cough. Eur Respir J2020: 1271. doi: 10.1183/13993003.congress-2020.1271
23.
ShahNM, AppsC, KaltsakasG, et al.The effect of pressure changes during mechanical insufflation-exsufflation on respiratory and airway physiology. Chest2024; 165: 929–941; doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2023.10.015
24.
ChatwinM and SimondsAK. Long-Term mechanical insufflation-exsufflation cough assistance in neuromuscular disease: patterns of use and lessons for application. Respir Care2020; 65: 135–143; doi: 10.4187/respcare.06882
25.
LachalR, LouisB, SubtilF, et al.Bench assessment of the effect of a collapsible tube on the efficiency of a mechanical insufflation-exsufflation device. Respir Care2019; 64: 752–759; doi: 10.4187/respcare.06478
26.
TerziN, VaugierI, GuérinC, et al.Comparison of four mechanical insufflation-exsufflation devices: effect of simulated airway collapse on cough peak flow. Respir Care2023; 68: 462–469; doi: 10.4187/respcare.10086
27.
Martinez-AlejosR, FresnelE, VuillermozA, et al.Accuracy of real-time data provided by mechanical insufflation-exsufflation devices. Respir Care2025; 70: 313–318; doi: 10.4187/respcare.12221
28.
PageMJ, McKenzieJE, BossuytPM, et al.The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ2021; 372: n71; doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71
29.
ShethVH, ShahNP, JainR, et al.Development and validation of a risk-of-bias tool for assessing in vitro studies conducted in dentistry: the QUIN. J Prosthet Dent2022.
30.
BalduzziS, RückerG, NikolakopoulouA, et al.netmeta: an R Package for Network Meta-Analysis Using Frequentist Methods. J Stat Soft2023; 106: 1–40; doi: 10.18637/jss.v106.i02
31.
GuérinC, BourdinG, LerayV, et al.Performance of the coughassist insufflation-exsufflation device in the presence of an endotracheal tube or tracheostomy tube: a bench study. Respir Care2011; 56: 1108–1114; doi: 10.4187/respcare.01121
32.
FrigerioP, LonghiniF, SommarivaM, et al.Bench comparative assessment of mechanically assisted cough devices. Respir Care2015; 60: 975–982; doi: 10.4187/respcare.03809
33.
BourdinG, GuérinC, LerayV, et al.Comparison of alpha 200 and coughassist as intermittent positive pressure breathing devices: a bench study. Respir Care2012; 57: 1129–1136; doi: 10.4187/respcare.01344
34.
ChatwinM, ToussaintM, GonçalvesMR, et al.Airway clearance techniques in neuromuscular disorders: a state of the art review. Respir Med2018; 136: 98–110; doi: 10.1016/j.rmed.2018.01.012
35.
AndersenT, FondenesO, RøksundOD, et al.From bedside to bench - In vivo and in vitro evaluation of mechanically assisted cough treatment in a patient with bulbar Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis. Respir Med Case Rep2022; 37: 101649; doi: 10.1016/j.rmcr.2022.101649
36.
PorotV and GuérinC. Bench assessment of a new insufflation-exsufflation device. Respir Care2013; 58: 1536–1540; doi: 10.4187/respcare.02345
37.
LalmoldaC, PradosH, MateuG, et al.Titration of mechanical insufflation-exsufflation optimal pressure combinations in neuromuscular diseases by flow/pressure waveform analysis. Arch Bronconeumol (Engl Ed)2019; 55: 246–251; doi: 10.1016/j.arbres.2018.10.011
38.
ShahNM, Madden-ScottS, AppsC, et al.Evaluation of the accuracy of a mechanical insufflation-exsufflation device’s cough peak flow measurement. Respir Care2025; 70: 1103–1109; doi: 10.1089/respcare.12514
39.
SchenaE, MassaroniC, SaccomandiP, et al.Flow measurement in mechanical ventilation: a review. Med Eng Phys2015; 37: 257–264; doi: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2015.01.010
40.
TomaS, ShokryM and DaoudE. Mechanical ventilator flow and pressure sensors: does location matter? JMV2023; 4: 19–29; doi: 10.53097/JMV.10071
41.
ChatwinM, SanchoJ, LujanM, et al.Waves of precision: a practical guide for reviewing new tools to evaluate mechanical in-exsufflation efficacy in neuromuscular disorders. J Clin Med2024; 13: 2643; doi: 10.3390/jcm13092643
42.
AndersenTM, SandnesA, FondenesO, et al.Laryngeal responses to mechanically assisted cough in progressing amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Respir Care2018; 63: 538–549; doi: 10.4187/respcare.05924
43.
SanchoJ, FerrerS, BuresE, et al.Waveforms analysis in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis for enhanced efficacy of mechanically assisted coughing. Respir Care2022; 67: 1226–1235. doi: 10.4187/respcare.09978
44.
Berger-EstilitaJ, HaenggiM, OttD, et al.Accuracy of the end-expiratory lung volume measured by the modified nitrogen washout/washin technique: a bench study. J Transl Med2021; 19: 36; doi: 10.1186/s12967-021-02703-x
45.
ChenZ-L, YanY-Z, YuH-Y, et al.Influence of compliance and resistance of the test lung on the accuracy of the tidal volume delivered by the ventilator. BMC Pulm Med2024; 24: 498; doi: 10.1186/s12890-024-03294-1
46.
LebretM, VuillermozA, FresnelE, et al.Discussion on comparison of four mechanical insufflation-exsufflation devices: effect of simulated airway collapse on cough peak flow. Respir Care2024; 69: 145–146; doi: 10.4187/respcare.11539
