Griffiths John, Barber Vicki S, Morgan Lesley, Young J Duncan
Adult Intensive Care Unit, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford OX3 9DU.
BMJ. 2005 May 28;330(7502):1243. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38467.485671.E0. Epub 2005 May 18.
To compare outcomes in critically ill patients undergoing artificial ventilation who received a tracheostomy early or late in their treatment.
The Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, the National Research Register, the NHS Trusts Clinical Trials Register, the Medical Research Council UK database, the NHS Research and Development Health Technology Assessment Programme, the British Heart Foundation database, citation review of relevant primary and review articles, and expert informants.
Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled studies that compared early tracheostomy with either late tracheostomy or prolonged endotracheal intubation. From 15,950 articles screened, 12 were identified as "randomised or quasi-randomised" controlled trials, and five were included for data extraction.
Five studies with 406 participants were analysed. Descriptive and outcome data were extracted. The main outcome measure was mortality in hospital. The incidence of hospital acquired pneumonia, length of stay in a critical care unit, and duration of artificial ventilation were also recorded. Random effects meta-analyses were performed.
Early tracheostomy did not significantly alter mortality (relative risk 0.79, 95% confidence interval 0.45 to 1.39). The risk of pneumonia was also unaltered by the timing of tracheostomy (0.90, 0.66 to 1.21). Early tracheostomy significantly reduced duration of artificial ventilation (weighted mean difference -8.5 days, 95% confidence interval -15.3 to -1.7) and length of stay in intensive care (-15.3 days, -24.6 to -6.1).
In critically ill adult patients who require prolonged mechanical ventilation, performing a tracheostomy at an earlier stage than is currently practised may shorten the duration of artificial ventilation and length of stay in intensive care.
比较在接受人工通气的重症患者中,早期或晚期进行气管切开术的治疗效果。
Cochrane临床对照试验中心注册库、医学索引数据库、荷兰医学文摘数据库、护理学与健康领域数据库、国家研究注册库、英国国民健康服务信托基金临床试验注册库、英国医学研究理事会数据库、英国国民健康服务研发健康技术评估项目、英国心脏基金会数据库、对相关原始文献和综述文章的引用回顾以及专家提供的信息。
比较早期气管切开术与晚期气管切开术或延长气管插管的随机和半随机对照研究。在筛选的15950篇文章中,有12篇被确定为“随机或半随机”对照试验,其中5篇纳入数据提取。
分析了5项研究,共406名参与者。提取了描述性数据和结果数据。主要结局指标是医院死亡率。还记录了医院获得性肺炎的发生率、重症监护病房的住院时间以及人工通气的持续时间。进行了随机效应荟萃分析。
早期气管切开术并未显著改变死亡率(相对风险0.79,95%置信区间0.45至1.39)。气管切开术的时机也未改变肺炎风险(0.90,0.66至1.21)。早期气管切开术显著缩短了人工通气的持续时间(加权平均差-8.5天,95%置信区间-15.3至-1.7)和重症监护病房的住院时间(-15.3天,-24.6至-6.1)。
对于需要长期机械通气的成年重症患者,比目前更早进行气管切开术可能会缩短人工通气的持续时间和重症监护病房的住院时间。