Lorente Leonardo, Lecuona María, Martín María M, García Carolina, Mora María L, Sierra Antonio
Department of Critical Care, Hospital Universitario de Canarias, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain.
Crit Care Med. 2005 Jan;33(1):115-9. doi: 10.1097/01.ccm.0000150267.40396.90.
The aim of this study was to analyze the prevalence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) using a closed-tracheal suction system vs. an open system.
Prospective and randomized study, from October 1, 2002, to December 31, 2003.
A 24-bed medical-surgical intensive care unit in a 650-bed tertiary hospital.
Patients requiring mechanical ventilation for >24 hrs.
Patients were randomized into two groups; one group was suctioned with the closed-tracheal suctioning system and another group with the open system.
Throat swabs were taken at admission and twice a week until discharge to classify pneumonia in endogenous and exogenous.
A total of 443 patients (210 with closed-tracheal suction system and 233 with the open system) were included. There were no significant differences between groups of patients in age, sex, diagnosis groups, mortality, number of aspirations per day, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score. No significant differences were found in either the percentage of patients who developed VAP (20.47% vs. 18.02%) or in the number of VAP cases per 1000 mechanical ventilation-days (17.59 vs. 15.84). There were also no differences in the VAP incidence by mechanical ventilation duration. At the same time, we did not find any differences in the incidence of exogenous VAP. Likewise, there were also no differences in the microorganisms responsible for pneumonia. Patient cost per day for the closed suction was more expensive than the open suction system (11.11 US dollars +/- 2.25 US dollars vs. 2.50 US dollars +/- 1.12 US dollars, p < .001).
We conclude that in our study, the closed-tracheal suction system did not reduce VAP incidence, even for exogenous pneumonia.
本研究旨在分析使用封闭式气管吸痰系统与开放式系统时呼吸机相关性肺炎(VAP)的患病率。
前瞻性随机研究,时间为2002年10月1日至2003年12月31日。
一家拥有650张床位的三级医院中的一个设有24张床位的内科-外科重症监护病房。
需要机械通气超过24小时的患者。
患者被随机分为两组;一组使用封闭式气管吸痰系统进行吸痰,另一组使用开放式系统。
入院时及每周两次直至出院时采集咽拭子,以将肺炎分为内源性和外源性。
共纳入443例患者(210例使用封闭式气管吸痰系统,233例使用开放式系统)。两组患者在年龄、性别、诊断组、死亡率、每日吸痰次数和急性生理与慢性健康状况评价II评分方面无显著差异。在发生VAP的患者百分比(20.47%对18.02%)或每1000机械通气日VAP病例数(17.59对15.84)方面均未发现显著差异。VAP发病率在机械通气持续时间方面也无差异。同时,我们在外源性VAP发病率方面未发现任何差异。同样,引起肺炎的微生物也无差异。封闭式吸痰的患者每日费用比开放式吸痰系统更昂贵(11.11美元±2.25美元对2.50美元±1.12美元,p<.001)。
我们得出结论,在我们的研究中,封闭式气管吸痰系统并未降低VAP发病率,即使对于外源性肺炎也是如此。