Suppr超能文献

通气新生儿和婴幼儿气管插管的深吸痰与浅吸痰

Deep versus shallow suction of endotracheal tubes in ventilated neonates and young infants.

作者信息

Spence K, Gillies D, Waterworth L

机构信息

Department of Neonatology, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Locked Bag 4001, Westmead, NSW, Australia.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003(3):CD003309. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003309.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Mechanical ventilation is commonly used in Neonatal Intensive Care Units to assist breathing in a variety of conditions. Mechanical ventilation is achieved through the placement of an endotracheal tube (ETT) which is left in-situ. The ETT is suctioned to prevent a build-up of secretions and therefore blockage of the airway. Methods of suctioning the endotracheal tube vary according to institutional practice and the individual clinician performing the task. The depth of suctioning is one of these variables. The catheter may be passed to the tip of the ETT or beyond the tip into the trachea or bronchi to facilitate removal of secretions. However, trauma to the lower airways may result from the suction catheter being passed into the airway beyond the tip of the endotracheal tube.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness and complications of deep (catheter passed beyond the tip of the ETT) versus shallow (catheter passed to length of ETT only) suctioning of the endotracheal tube in ventilated infants.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Using text words and subject headings relevant to endotracheal suctioning, searches were made of the Oxford Database of Perinatal Trials, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2002), MEDLINE (from January 1966 to December 2002, all languages), CINAHL (from 1982 to 2002). In addition, a call was placed on the list servers, NICU-NET and Neonatal-Talk for unpublished trials, conference presentations and current trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Controlled trials using random or quasi-random allocation of neonates receiving ventilatory support via an endotracheal tube to either deep or shallow endotracheal suctioning.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

No studies were found meeting the criteria for inclusion in this review

MAIN RESULTS

No studies were found meeting the criteria for inclusion in this review

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence from randomised controlled trials concerning the benefits or risks of deep versus shallow suctioning of endo-tracheal tubes in ventilated neonates and infants. Further high quality research would be required to conclusively establish whether there are any benefits to deep or shallow suctioning. However, as it may be considered unethical to conduct a trial of deep suctioning given anecdotal evidence regarding possible damage to the airway, it is proposed that a randomised controlled trial comparing deep with shallow suctioning may be considered in a NICU where the standard practice includes a deep suctioning technique.

摘要

背景

机械通气在新生儿重症监护病房中常用于多种情况下的呼吸辅助。机械通气通过放置一根留在原位的气管内导管(ETT)来实现。对气管内导管进行吸引以防止分泌物积聚,从而避免气道阻塞。气管内导管的吸引方法因机构惯例和执行该任务的个体临床医生而异。吸引深度就是这些变量之一。导管可插入到气管内导管的尖端或超出尖端进入气管或支气管以利于分泌物的清除。然而,吸引导管插入到气管内导管尖端之外的气道可能会导致下呼吸道损伤。

目的

比较通气婴儿中气管内导管深吸引(导管插入超过气管内导管尖端)与浅吸引(导管仅插入到气管内导管长度)的有效性和并发症。

检索策略

使用与气管内吸引相关的文本词和主题词,检索了牛津围产期试验数据库、Cochrane对照试验注册库(《Cochrane图书馆》,2002年第3期)、MEDLINE(1966年1月至2002年12月,所有语言)、CINAHL(1982年至2002年)。此外,还在NICU-NET和Neonatal-Talk列表服务器上征集未发表的试验、会议报告和当前试验。

选择标准

采用随机或准随机分配接受气管内导管通气支持的新生儿进行深或浅气管内吸引的对照试验。

数据收集与分析

未发现符合本综述纳入标准的研究。

主要结果

未发现符合本综述纳入标准的研究。

综述作者结论

随机对照试验中没有证据表明通气新生儿和婴儿气管内导管深吸引与浅吸引的益处或风险。需要进一步的高质量研究来最终确定深吸引或浅吸引是否有任何益处。然而,鉴于有关于气道可能受损的传闻证据,进行深吸引试验可能被认为是不道德的,因此建议在标准做法包括深吸引技术的新生儿重症监护病房中考虑进行比较深吸引与浅吸引的随机对照试验。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验