Suppr超能文献

[机械通气患者中使用加热湿化器及带有增强器的热湿交换过滤器的临床与微生物学比较]

[The clinical and microbiological comparison of the use of heated humidifiers and heat and moisture exchanger filters with Booster in mechanically ventilated patients].

作者信息

Nadir Oziş Türkan, Ozcan Kanat Derya, Oğuzülgen Ipek Kivilcim, Aydoğdu Müge, Hizel Kenan, Gürsel Gül

机构信息

Department of Chest Diseases, Faculty of Medicine, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey.

出版信息

Tuberk Toraks. 2009;57(3):259-67.

Abstract

Ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP) is the most frequent nosocomial infection in intensive care units that is associated with prolonged mechanical ventilation, hospitalization and increased health-care costs. Various humidifiers can be used for humidification during mechanical ventilation. Many studies were conducted to identify the effects of two different humidifiers, i.e. heated humidifiers and heat and moisture exchanger filters (HME), on VAP development; and HME filters were found to decrease the VAP frequency. In this study we aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of heated humidifiers and HME-Booster. Heated humidifier with conventional microbiologic filter (CMF-HH) or HME-Booster were used in randomization to 41 mechanically ventilated patients of our intensive care unit, and patients were divided into two groups as group 1 receiving CMF-HH (20 patients) and group 2 (21 patients) receiving HME-Booster. Daily secretion scores, endotracheal tube occlusion due to secretions, VAP development rate for the assessment of microbiological safety of humidifiers and differences in PETCO(2) and PaCO(2) values for the assessment of their effect on arterial blood gas were recorded prospectively. The measurement of PETCO(2) and PaCO(2) values were performed with the presence of humidifiers and after removing them in both groups. In both groups with the removal of CMF-HH and HME-Booster, a decrease in PETCO(2) value was identified, but the decrease in group 2 was statistically significant (p= 0.016). The decrease in PaCO(2) after removal of humidifiers was greater in group 2 than in group 1, but the difference was not significant (p> 0.05).The rate of VAP and endotracheal tube occlusion was not significantly different between the groups. The mean secretion score was lower in group 1 (p= 0.041). In conclusion, although both humidifiers have similar microbiological effects, heated humidifiers could be preferred particularly for the patients with an underlying chronic lung disease due to its positive effects on PETCO(2) values and secretion scores.

摘要

呼吸机相关性肺炎(VAP)是重症监护病房中最常见的医院感染,与机械通气时间延长、住院时间延长及医疗费用增加相关。机械通气期间可使用各种加湿器进行湿化。开展了多项研究以确定两种不同加湿器,即加热加湿器和热湿交换器过滤器(HME)对VAP发生的影响;结果发现HME过滤器可降低VAP发生率。在本研究中,我们旨在比较加热加湿器和HME增强器的疗效和安全性。将配备传统微生物过滤器的加热加湿器(CMF-HH)或HME增强器随机用于我们重症监护病房的41例机械通气患者,患者分为两组,第1组接受CMF-HH(20例患者),第2组(21例患者)接受HME增强器。前瞻性记录每日分泌物评分、因分泌物导致的气管插管堵塞、用于评估加湿器微生物安全性的VAP发生率以及用于评估其对动脉血气影响的PETCO₂和PaCO₂值的差异。两组均在有加湿器时及移除加湿器后测量PETCO₂和PaCO₂值。在移除CMF-HH和HME增强器的两组中,均发现PETCO₂值降低,但第2组的降低具有统计学意义(p = 0.016)。移除加湿器后第2组的PaCO₂降低幅度大于第1组,但差异无统计学意义(p>0.05)。两组之间的VAP发生率和气管插管堵塞情况无显著差异。第1组的平均分泌物评分较低(p = 0.041)。总之,尽管两种加湿器具有相似的微生物学效应,但由于加热加湿器对PETCO₂值和分泌物评分有积极影响,对于患有潜在慢性肺部疾病的患者可能更适合选用。

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