School of Respiratory Therapy, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Respir Care. 2012 Feb;57(2):204-10. doi: 10.4187/respcare.01141. Epub 2011 Jul 12.
The effectiveness of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) after extubation in preventing post-extubation respiratory failure is still controversial.
We conducted a prospective, multicenter randomized controlled study involving patients on mechanical ventilation for > 48 hours who tolerated a 2-hour spontaneous breathing trial and were subsequently extubated. The patients were randomized to NIV or standard medical therapy. Re-intubation rate within 72 hours was the primary outcome measure. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to determine predictors for extubation failure.
We randomized 406 patients to either NIV (no. = 202) or standard medical therapy (no. = 204). The 2 groups had similar baseline clinical characteristics. There were no differences in extubation failure (13.2% in control and 14.9% in NIV), intensive care unit or hospital mortality. Cardiac failure was a more common cause of extubation failure in control than in NIV. There was no difference in rapid shallow breathing index (RSBI) in extubation failure patients between control (80) and NIV (73). When using data from all patients, we found Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) scores (odds ratio [OR] 1.13, 95% CI 1.07-1.20, P < .001), maximal inspiratory pressure (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.00-1.08, P = .03), and RSBI (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.02-1.05, P < .001) to be predictors of extubation failure. Abundant secretions were the most common reason (35.1%) for extubation failure identified by attending physicians.
Preventive use of NIV after extubation in patients who passed spontaneous breathing trial did not show benefits in decreasing extubation failure rate or the mortality rate.
在拔管后使用无创通气(NIV)预防拔管后呼吸衰竭的有效性仍存在争议。
我们进行了一项前瞻性、多中心随机对照研究,纳入了接受机械通气>48 小时、耐受 2 小时自主呼吸试验且随后拔管的患者。患者被随机分配至 NIV 或标准药物治疗组。72 小时内再插管率为主要观察终点。采用多变量逻辑回归分析确定拔管失败的预测因素。
我们将 406 例患者随机分为 NIV 组(n=202)或标准药物治疗组(n=204)。两组患者的基线临床特征相似。两组间的拔管失败率(对照组 13.2%,NIV 组 14.9%)、重症监护病房或医院死亡率均无差异。与 NIV 组相比,对照组中心脏衰竭是导致拔管失败的更常见原因。在拔管失败患者中,对照组(80)和 NIV 组(73)的快速浅呼吸指数(RSBI)无差异。当使用所有患者的数据时,我们发现急性生理学和慢性健康评估(APACHE II)评分(比值比[OR] 1.13,95%可信区间 1.07-1.20,P<0.001)、最大吸气压力(OR 1.04,95%可信区间 1.00-1.08,P=0.03)和 RSBI(OR 1.03,95%可信区间 1.02-1.05,P<0.001)是拔管失败的预测因素。主管医生认为,大量分泌物是导致拔管失败的最常见原因(35.1%)。
在通过自主呼吸试验的患者中,拔管后预防性使用 NIV 并不能降低拔管失败率或死亡率。