Hata J Steven, Togashi Kei, Kumar Avinash B, Hodges Linda D, Kaiser Eric F, Tessmann Paul B, Faust Christopher A, Sessler Daniel I
Departments of Outcomes Research, Cardiac Anesthesiology, and General Anesthesiology, Center for Critical Care, Anesthesiology Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA Department of Cardiac Anesthesiology, Center for Critical Care Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA Department of General Anesthesiology, Center for Critical Care Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA Anesthesiology Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
J Intensive Care Med. 2014 Nov-Dec;29(6):348-56. doi: 10.1177/0885066613488747. Epub 2013 Jul 11.
Methods to optimize positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remain controversial despite decades of research. The pressure-volume curve (PVC), a graphical ventilator relationship, has been proposed for prescription of PEEP in ARDS. Whether the use of PVC's improves survival remains unclear.
In this systematic review, we assessed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PVC-guided treatment with conventional PEEP management on survival in ARDS based on the search of the National Library of Medicine from January 1, 1960, to January 1, 2010, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Three RCTs were identified with a total of 185 patients, 97 with PVC-guided treatment and 88 with conventional PEEP management.
The PVC-guided PEEP was associated with an increased probability of 28-day or hospital survival (odds ratio [OR] 2.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.5, 4.9) using a random-effects model without significant heterogeneity (I (2) test: P = .75). The PVC-guided ventilator support was associated with reduced cumulative risk of mortality (-0.24 (95% CI -0.38, -0.11). The PVC-managed patients received greater PEEP (standardized mean difference [SMD] 5.7 cm H2O, 95% CI 2.4, 9.0) and lower plateau pressures (SMD -1.2 cm H2O, 95% CI -2.2, -0.2), albeit with greater hypercapnia with increased arterial pCO2 (SMD 8 mm Hg, 95% CI 2, 14). Weight-adjusted tidal volumes were significantly lower in PVC-guided than conventional ventilator management (SMD 2.6 mL/kg, 95% CI -3.3, -2.0).
This analysis supports an association that ventilator management guided by the PVC for PEEP management may augment survival in ARDS. Nonetheless, only 3 randomized trials have addressed the question, and the total number of patients remains low. Further outcomes studies appear required for the validation of this methodology.
尽管经过数十年研究,但急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)中优化呼气末正压(PEEP)的方法仍存在争议。压力-容积曲线(PVC),一种通气机的图形关系,已被提议用于ARDS中PEEP的设定。使用PVC是否能提高生存率仍不明确。
在这项系统评价中,我们基于检索1960年1月1日至2010年1月1日的美国国立医学图书馆以及Cochrane对照试验中心注册库,评估了比较PVC引导治疗与传统PEEP管理对ARDS患者生存率影响的随机对照试验(RCT)。共识别出3项RCT,总计185例患者,其中97例接受PVC引导治疗,88例接受传统PEEP管理。
采用无异质性显著的随机效应模型(I²检验:P = 0.75),PVC引导的PEEP与28天或住院生存率增加相关(优势比[OR] 2.7,95%置信区间[CI] 1.5,4.9)。PVC引导的通气支持与累积死亡风险降低相关(-0.24(95% CI -0.38,-0.11))。接受PVC管理的患者接受了更高的PEEP(标准化均值差[SMD] 5.7 cm H₂O,95% CI 2.4,9.0)和更低的平台压(SMD -1.2 cm H₂O,95% CI -2.2,-0.2),尽管伴有动脉血二氧化碳分压升高导致的高碳酸血症加重(SMD 8 mmHg,95% CI 2,14)。与传统通气管理相比,PVC引导下体重校正后的潮气量显著更低(SMD 2.6 mL/kg,95% CI -3.3,-2.0)。
该分析支持一种关联,即由PVC引导进行PEEP管理的通气管理可能提高ARDS患者的生存率。尽管如此,仅有3项随机试验探讨了这个问题,且患者总数仍然较少。似乎需要进一步的结局研究来验证这种方法。