Select region

Our goal is to help keep your adult, pediatric and neonatal patients as safe and comfortable as possible with easy to use, easy to apply ventilation.

Why you will love to work with a Servo Ventilator

Increase patient safety

Reduce workload and limit use errors and close calls with a Servo Ventilator.[1]

Deliver optimal support

Wean patients earlier from mechanical ventilation with fewer complications and less sedation.[2] [3] [4]

Adapt to your needs

Provide quality ventilation for every situation and for patients of all sizes, from neonates through adults.

Secure your investment

Reliable performance, low maintenance and easy connection to your hospital systems.

Increase patient safety

choosing an easy-to-use mechanical ventilator has a positive impact on patient safety and staff workload

Keep your patients safer and reduce staff workload

A recent study in Critical Care showed that by choosing an easy-to-use mechanical ventilator you can positively impact patient safety and staff workload.[1]

Clinician in nicu ward adjusting Servo 900 ventilator beside neonate in incubator

The Servo Ventilator story

This is a story of a revolution. One that would change our perception of intensive care ventilation forever. A scientific wonder that captivated the medical world more than fifty years ago, and one that pioneered our understanding of personalized ventilation we know today. We called it the Servo ventilator. The world’s first flow-controlled ventilator with a rapid servo control system.

Deliver optimal ventilation and wean earlier

Studies show that a number of ICU patients have difficulties breathing with a ventilator. These patients face several ventilation challenges [5] and consume a disproportionate amount of resources.[6] Scroll down to learn how we can help you meet these challenges.

Getinge Servo-u

Challenge: Avoid intubation in patients with respiratory failure

Non-invasive respiratory support can reduce the need for intubation and resulting complications such as ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP),[7] excessive sedation,[8] delirium [9] and ICU-acquired weakness.[10] Non-invasive support allows patients to remain active, a strategy now adopted in many ICUs. Servo-u offers multiple options to support your patients with non-invasive therapies.

Getinge Servo-u

Challenge: Prevent ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI) during assisted ventilation

Studies have demonstrated that Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist (NAVA) promotes lung protective spontaneous breathing with improved patient-ventilator synchrony and gas exchange.[14] [15] While on NAVA, the respiratory centers and reflexes in the lungs and upper airways will instantly limit tidal volumes when the lungs are overdistended. This gives patients the opportunity to choose their own tidal volumes and respiratory patterns, which may limit VILI.[16] [17]

Challenge: Prevent delayed weaning

A recent study shows that 29% of patients experience weaning failure due to diaphragm dysfunction. It extends time on mechanical ventilation by up to 16 days.[18] But thanks to NAVA ventilation you can have a more comfortable patient with less sedation and an active diaphragm, which may help you promote early weaning.[2] [3] [4] Furthermore, monitoring diaphragm activity (Edi) can help you assess weaning readiness and monitor work of breathing during recovery, even when there is no ventilator support.[27]

Getinge Servo-u

Secure your investment and take the stress out of ownership

Cost-effective care

Servo Ventilators are easy to learn and use, have few parts to clean, and are easy to maintain, which promotes minimal training time and high staff efficiency.

Connected to your environment

Servo Ventilators connect to a number of PDMS systems and patient monitors.[1] An HL7 converter makes the system conform to IHE technical framework.

Smart fleet management

Similar look and feel between ventilators and interchangeable plug-in modules increase convenience and allows for high acuity ventilators to work alongside more mobile solutions.

  1. 1. Plinio P. Morita, Peter B. Weinstein, Christopher J. Flewwelling, Carleene A. Bañez, Tabitha A. Chiu, Mario Iannuzzi, Aastha H. Patel, Ashleigh P. Shier and Joseph A. Cafazzo. The usability of ventilators: a comparative evaluation of use safety and user experience. Critical Care201620:263.

  2. 2. Emeriaud G, et al. Evolution of inspiratory diaphragm activity in children over the course of the PICU stay. Intensive Care Med. 2014 Nov;40(11):1718-26.

  3. 3. Bellani G, Pesenti A. Assessing effort and work of breathing. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2014 Jun;20(3):352-8.

  4. 4. Barwing J, et al. Electrical activity of the diaphragm (EAdi) as a monitoring parameter in difficult weaning from respirator: a pilot study. Crit Care. 2013 Aug 28;17(4):R182.

  5. 5. Goligher EC1, Ferguson ND2, Brochard LJ3. Clinical challenges in mechanical ventilation. Lancet. 2016 Apr 30;387(10030):1856-66.

  6. 6. Jarr S, et al.Outcomes of and resource consumption by high-cost patients in the intensive care unit. Am J Crit Care. 2002 Sep;11(5):467-73.

  7. 7. American Thoracic Society; Infectious Diseases Society of America. Guidelines for the management of adults with hospital-acquired, ventilator-associated, and healthcare-associated pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2005;171(4):388-416.

  8. 8. Kress JP, Pohlman AS, O’Connor MF, Hall JB. Daily interruption of sedative infusions in critically ill patients undergoing mechanical ventilation. N Engl J Med. 2000;342(20):1471-1477.

  9. 9. Ely EW, Shintani A, Truman B, et al. Delirium as a predictor of mortality in mechanically ventilated patients in the intensive care unit. JAMA. 2004;291 (14):1753-1762.

  10. 10. Kress JP, Hall JB. ICU-acquired weakness and recovery from critical illness. N Engl J Med. 2014; 370(17):1626-1635. Slutsky AS. Neuromuscular blocking agents in ARDS. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(12):1176-1180.

  11. 11. Slutsky AS, Ranieri VM. Ventilator-induced lung injury. N Engl J Med. 2014 Mar 6;370(10):980.

  12. 12. Ventilation with lower tidal volumes as compared with traditional tidal volumes for acute lung injury and the acute respiratory distress syndrome. The Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network. N Engl J Med. 2000 May 4;342(18):1301-8.

  13. 13. Amato et al. Driving pressure and survival in the acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2015 Feb 19;372(8):747-55.

  14. 14. Sinderby C, Navalesi P, Beck J, Skrobik Y, Comtois N, Friberg S, Gottfried SB, Lindström L: Neural control of mechanical ventilation in respiratory failure. Nat Med. 1999, 5: 1433-1436. 10.1038/71012.

  15. 15. Piquilloud L, Vignaux L, Bialais E, Roeseler J, Sottiaux T, Laterre P-F, Jolliet P, Tassaux D: Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist improves patient-ventilator interaction. Intensive Care Med. 2011, 37: 263-271. 10.1007/s00134-010-2052-9.

  16. 16. Brander L, Sinderby C, Lecomte F, Leong-Poi H, Bell D, Beck J, Tsoporis JN, Vaschetto R, Schultz MJ, Parker TG, Villar J, Zhang H, Slutsky AS: Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist decreases ventilator-induced lung injury and non-pulmonary organ dysfunction in rabbits with acute lung injury. Intensive Care Med. 2009, 35: 1979-1989. 10.1007/s00134-009-1626-x.

  17. 17. Patroniti N, et al. Respiratory pattern during neurally adjusted ventilatory assist in acute respiratory failure patients. Intensive Care Med. 2012 Feb;38(2):230-9.

  18. 18. Kim et al. Diaphragm dysfunction (DD) assessed by ultrasonography: influence on weaning from mechanical ventilation. Crit Care Med. 2011 Dec;39(12):2627-30.

  19. 19. Schepens T, et al. The course of diaphragm atrophy in ventilated patients assessed with ultrasound: a longitudinal cohort study. Crit Care. 2015 Dec 7;19:422.

  20. 20. Cecchini J, et al. Increased diaphragmatic contribution to inspiratory effort during neutrally adjusted ventilatory assistance versus pressure support: an electromyographic study. Anesthesiology. 2014 Nov;121(5):1028-36.

  21. 21. Di Mussi R, et al. Impact of prolonged assisted ventilation on diaphragmatic efficiency: NAVA versus PSV. Crit Care. 2016 Jan 5;20(1):1.

  22. 22. Thille AW, Rodriguez P, Cabello B, Lellouche F, Brochard L. Patient-ventilator asynchrony during mechanical ventilation: prevalence and risk factors. Intensive Care Med 2006;32(10):1515–1522.

  23. 23. Tobin MJ, etal. Respiratory muscle dysfunction in mechanically ventilated patients. Mol Cell Biochem 1998;179(1-2):87–98.

  24. 24. Sassoon CS, Foster GT. Patient-ventilator asynchrony. Curr Opin Crit Care 2001;7(1):28–33.

  25. 25. Blanch L, et al. Asynchronies during mechanical ventilation are associated with mortality. Intensive Care Med. 2015 Apr;41(4):633-41.

  26. 26. Pohlman MC, et al. Excessive tidal volume from breath stacking during lung-protective ventilation for acute lung injury. Crit Care Med 2008;36(11):3019–3023.

  27. 27. Colombo D, et al. Efficacy of ventilator waveforms observation in detecting patient–ventilator asynchrony. Crit Care Med. 2011 Nov;39(11):2452-7.

  28. 28. de la Oliva, Schuffelmann C, Gomez-Zamora A, Vilar J, Kacmarek RM. Asynchrony, neural drive, ventilatory variability and COMFORT: NAVA vs pressure support in pediatric patients. A nonrandomized cross-over trial. Int Care med. Epub ahead of print April 6 2012.

  29. 29. Beck J, Reilly M, Grasselli G, Mirabella L, Slutsky AS, Dunn MS, Sinderby C. Patient-ventilator interaction during neurally adjusted ventilator assist in very low birth weight infants. Pediatr Res. 2009 Jun;65(6):663-8.