Suppr超能文献

苯二氮䓬类与非苯二氮䓬类药物在机械通气危重症成人患者中的镇静作用比较:一项随机试验的系统评价和荟萃分析。

Benzodiazepine versus nonbenzodiazepine-based sedation for mechanically ventilated, critically ill adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

机构信息

Department of Pharmacy, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.

出版信息

Crit Care Med. 2013 Sep;41(9 Suppl 1):S30-8. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3182a16898.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Use of dexmedetomidine or propofol rather than a benzodiazepine sedation strategy may improve ICU outcomes. We reviewed randomized trials comparing a benzodiazepine and nonbenzodiazepine regimen in mechanically ventilated adult ICU patients to determine if differences exist between these sedation strategies with respect to ICU length of stay, time on the ventilator, delirium prevalence, and short-term mortality.

METHODS

We searched CINAHL, MEDLINE, the Cochrane databases, and the American College of Critical Care Medicine's Pain, Agitation, Delirium Management Guidelines' literature database from 1996 to 2013. Citations were screened for randomized trials that enrolled critically ill, mechanically ventilated adults comparing an IV benzodiazepine-based to a nonbenzodiazepine-based sedative regimen and reported duration of ICU length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, delirium prevalence, and/or short-term mortality. Trial characteristics and results were abstracted in duplicate and independently, and the Cochrane risk of bias tool was used for quality assessment. We performed random effects model meta-analyses where possible.

RESULTS

We included six trials enrolling 1,235 patients: midazolam versus dexmedetomidine (n = 3), lorazepam versus dexmedetomidine (n = 1), midazolam versus propofol (n = 1), and lorazepam versus propofol (n = 1). Compared to a benzodiazepine sedative strategy, a nonbenzodiazepine sedative strategy was associated with a shorter ICU length of stay (n = 6 studies; difference = 1.62 d; 95% CI, 0.68-2.55; I = 0%; p = 0.0007) and duration of mechanical ventilation (n = 4 studies; difference = 1.9 d; 95% CI, 1.70-2.09; I2 = 0%; p < 0.00001) but a similar prevalence of delirium (n = 2; risk ratio = 0.83; 95% CI, 0.61-1.11; I2 = 84%; p = 0.19) and short-term mortality rate (n = 4; risk ratio = 0.98; 95% CI, 0.76-1.27; I2 = 30%; p = 0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

Current controlled data suggest that use of a dexmedetomidine- or propofol-based sedation regimen rather than a benzodiazepine-based sedation regimen in critically ill adults may reduce ICU length of stay and duration of mechanical ventilation. Larger controlled studies are needed to further define the impact of nonbenzodiazepine sedative regimens on delirium and short-term mortality.

摘要

背景

使用右美托咪定或丙泊酚而非苯二氮䓬类药物镇静策略可能会改善 ICU 结局。我们回顾了比较机械通气成人 ICU 患者使用苯二氮䓬类药物和非苯二氮䓬类药物方案的随机试验,以确定这些镇静策略在 ICU 住院时间、呼吸机使用时间、谵妄发生率和短期死亡率方面是否存在差异。

方法

我们从 1996 年至 2013 年在 CINAHL、MEDLINE、Cochrane 数据库和美国重症监护医学协会疼痛、躁动、谵妄管理指南文献数据库中进行了检索。筛选出比较静脉注射苯二氮䓬类药物与非苯二氮䓬类药物镇静方案并报告 ICU 住院时间、机械通气时间、谵妄发生率和/或短期死亡率的随机试验。试验特征和结果由两名研究人员独立提取,并使用 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具进行质量评估。在可能的情况下,我们进行了随机效应模型荟萃分析。

结果

我们纳入了六项纳入 1235 名患者的试验:咪达唑仑与右美托咪定(n = 3)、劳拉西泮与右美托咪定(n = 1)、咪达唑仑与丙泊酚(n = 1)和劳拉西泮与丙泊酚(n = 1)。与苯二氮䓬类药物镇静策略相比,非苯二氮䓬类药物镇静策略与较短的 ICU 住院时间(n = 6 项研究;差异 = 1.62 d;95% CI,0.68-2.55;I = 0%;p = 0.0007)和机械通气时间(n = 4 项研究;差异 = 1.9 d;95% CI,1.70-2.09;I2 = 0%;p < 0.00001)相关,但谵妄发生率(n = 2 项研究;风险比 = 0.83;95% CI,0.61-1.11;I2 = 84%;p = 0.19)和短期死亡率(n = 4 项研究;风险比 = 0.98;95% CI,0.76-1.27;I2 = 30%;p = 0.88)相似。

结论

目前的对照数据表明,在危重病成人中使用右美托咪定或丙泊酚镇静方案而非苯二氮䓬类药物镇静方案可能会缩短 ICU 住院时间和机械通气时间。需要更大规模的对照研究来进一步明确非苯二氮䓬类药物镇静方案对谵妄和短期死亡率的影响。

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