Suppr超能文献

两种不同类型的热湿交换器在通气患者中的比较。

Comparison of two different types of heat and moisture exchangers in ventilated patients.

作者信息

Ahmed Syed Moied, Mahajan Jyotsna, Nadeem Abu

机构信息

Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, JN Medical College, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India.

出版信息

J Emerg Trauma Shock. 2009 Sep;2(3):164-9. doi: 10.4103/0974-2700.55327.

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy of two different types of Heat and Moisture Exchangers (HME filters) in reducing transmission of infection from the patient to ventilator and vice versa and also its cost effectiveness.

DESIGN

Randomized, controlled, double blind, prospective study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

60 patients admitted to the ICU from May 1, 2007 to July 31, 2007 of either sex, age ranging between 20 and 60 years, requiring mechanical ventilation were screened for the study. Following intubation of the patients, the HME device was attached to the breathing circuit randomly by the chit-in-a box method. The patients were divided into two groups according to the HME filters attached.

RESULTS

Both the groups were comparable with respect to age and sex ratio. In Type A HME filters, 80% showed growth on the patient end within 24 h and in 27% filters, culture was positive both on the patient and the machine ends. The organisms detected were Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa and co-related with the endotracheal aspirate culture. After 48 h, 87% filters developed organisms on the patient end, whereas 64% filters were culture positive both on the patient and the machine end. In Type B HME filters, 70% showed growth on patient's end after 24 h. Organisms detected were S. aureus, E. coli, P. aeruginosa and Acinetobacter. Thirty percent of filters were culture negative on both the patient and machine ends. No growth was found on the machine end in any of the filters after 24 h. After 48 h, 73% of the filters had microbial growth on the patient end, whereas only 3% filters had growth (S. aureus) on the machine end only. Seven percent had growth on both the patient as well as the machine ends. The microorganisms detected on the HME filters co-related with the endotracheal aspirate cultures.

CONCLUSION

HME filter Type B (study group) was significantly better in reducing contamination of ventilator from the patient as compared to Type A (control group), which was routinely used in our ICU. Type B filter was found to be effective for at least 48 h. This study can also be applied to patients coming to emergency department (ED) and requiring emergency surgery and postoperative ventilation; and trauma patients like flail chest, head injury etc. requiring ventilatory support to prevent them from acquiring ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP).

摘要

研究目的

比较两种不同类型的热湿交换器(HME过滤器)在减少患者与呼吸机之间感染传播以及其成本效益方面的效果。

设计

随机、对照、双盲、前瞻性研究。

患者与方法

筛选了2007年5月1日至2007年7月31日入住重症监护病房(ICU)、年龄在20至60岁之间、需要机械通气的60例患者进行研究。患者插管后,通过抽签法将HME装置随机连接到呼吸回路。根据所连接的HME过滤器将患者分为两组。

结果

两组在年龄和性别比例方面具有可比性。在A型HME过滤器中,80%在患者端24小时内显示有细菌生长,27%的过滤器在患者端和机器端培养均为阳性。检测到的微生物有金黄色葡萄球菌、大肠杆菌和铜绿假单胞菌,且与气管内吸出物培养结果相关。48小时后,87%的过滤器在患者端出现细菌生长,而64%的过滤器在患者端和机器端培养均为阳性。在B型HME过滤器中,24小时后70%在患者端显示有细菌生长。检测到的微生物有金黄色葡萄球菌、大肠杆菌、铜绿假单胞菌和不动杆菌。30%的过滤器在患者端和机器端培养均为阴性。24小时后,所有过滤器在机器端均未发现细菌生长。48小时后,73%的过滤器在患者端有微生物生长,而只有3%的过滤器仅在机器端有生长(金黄色葡萄球菌)。7%在患者端和机器端均有生长。在HME过滤器上检测到的微生物与气管内吸出物培养结果相关。

结论

与我们ICU常规使用的A型(对照组)相比,B型HME过滤器(研究组)在减少患者对呼吸机的污染方面明显更好。B型过滤器被发现至少48小时有效。本研究也可应用于到急诊科(ED)就诊、需要急诊手术和术后通气的患者;以及连枷胸、头部受伤等需要通气支持以预防呼吸机相关性肺炎(VAP)的创伤患者。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b051/2776363/fe4cead7ca84/JETS-02-164-g001.jpg

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