The DAR™ closed suction system is designed to expel tracheal secretions and preserve airway clearance for patients with an artificial airway in place. Compared to open suctioning, closed suction systems have been shown to reduce the physiological impact of endotracheal suctioning to the patient and offer protection for the clinician.1
The DAR™ closed suction system features a replaceable catheter — a step forward in endotracheal suctioning. Post-suction catheter removal, facilitated by a self-sealing cap on the patient access valve, permits bronchoscopy, mucus sampling, or bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) procedures. Available with dedicated ports for catheter rinsing and MDI drug delivery, the DAR™ closed suction system with replaceable catheter is ideal for diverse treatment needs.
Closed suctioning offers many potential benefits compared to open suctioning, including continued delivery of oxygen and positive pressure, decreased nosocomial infection, and reduced staff exposure.2
The unique rotating patient access valve maintains airway isolation when suctioning isn’t required and ensures a closed system during bronchoscopy and specimen sampling.
The irrigation port’s one-way valve is intended to prevent patient secretions from flowing back and potentially minimize contamination risks. The catheter tip is cleaned in full isolation through the rinsing chamber’s special geometry.
The suction valve’s rotating lid functions as an open-closed locking mechanism, providing easy procedure control. ISO color coding enables immediate catheter size identification, assisting caregivers in system selection, while depth markings in centimeters facilitate catheter insertion into the trachea.
The DAR™ neonatal-pediatric closed suction system was developed with the same advanced technology from the adult version and boasts features tailored for neonatal and pediatric physiologic conditions.
The use of a closed suction system, compared to open suctioning, can help minimize some short-term suctioning-related complications for newborn and pediatric patients by producing less cardiorespiratory distress.8
Potential benefits include:
1. Ramírez-Torres CA, Rivera-Sanz F, Sufrate-Sorzano T, Pedraz-Marcos A, Santolalla-Arnedo I. Closed endotracheal suction systems for COVID-19: rapid review. Interact J Med Res. 2023;12:e42549.
2. Walsh BK, Hood K, Merritt G. Pediatric airway maintenance and clearance in the acute care setting: how to stay out of trouble. Respir Care. 2011;56(9):1424–40; discussion 1440–4. doi: 10.4187/respcare.01323.
3. Dexter AM, Scott JB. Airway management and ventilator-associated events. Respir Care. 2019;64(8):986–993. doi: 10.4187/respcare.07107.
4. Blakeman TC, Scott JB, Yoder MA, Capellari E, Strickland SL. AARC clinical practice guidelines: artificial airway suctioning. Respir Care. 2022;67(2):258–271. doi: 10.4187/respcare.09548.
5. Elmansoury A, Said H. Closed suction system versus open suction. Egypt J Chest Dis Tuberc. 2017;66(3):509–515.
6. Subirana M, Solà I, Benito S. Closed tracheal suction systems versus open tracheal suction systems for mechanically ventilated adult patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(4):CD004581.
7. Ricard JD, Eveillard M, Martin Y, Barnaud G, Branger C, Dreyfuss D. Influence of tracheal suctioning systems on health care workers' gloves and equipment contamination: a comparison of closed and open systems. Am J Infect Control. 2011;39(7):605–7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2010.10.031. Epub April 21, 2011.
8. Taylor JE, Hawley G, Flenady V, Woodgate PG. Tracheal suctioning without disconnection in intubated ventilated neonates. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;2011(12):CD003065. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003065.pub2.