CMAJ. 2014 Feb 18;186(3):E112-22. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.130974. Epub 2013 Dec 9.
Noninvasive ventilation has been studied as a means of reducing complications among patients being weaned from invasive mechanical ventilation. We sought to summarize evidence comparing noninvasive and invasive weaning and their effects on mortality.
We identified relevant randomized and quasirandomized trials through searches of databases, conference proceedings and grey literature. We included trials comparing extubation and immediate application of noninvasive ventilation with continued invasive weaning in adults on mechanical ventilation. Two reviewers each independently screened citations, assessed trial quality and abstracted data. Our primary outcome was mortality.
We identified 16 trials involving 994 participants, most of whom had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Compared with invasive weaning, noninvasive weaning significantly reduced mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36 to 0.80), weaning failures (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.96), ventilator-associated pneumonia (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.43), length of stay in the intensive care unit (mean difference [MD] -5.59 d, 95% CI -7.90 to -3.28) and in hospital (MD -6.04 d, 95% CI -9.22 to -2.87), and total duration of mechanical ventilation (MD -5.64 d, 95% CI -9.50 to -1.77). Noninvasive weaning had no significant effect on the duration of ventilation related to weaning, but significantly reduced rates of tracheostomy (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.47) and reintubation (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.97). Mortality benefits were significantly greater in trials enrolling patients with COPD than in trials enrolling mixed patient populations (RR 0.36 [95% CI 0.24 to 0.56] v. RR 0.81 [95% CI 0.47 to 1.40]).
Noninvasive weaning reduces rates of death and pneumonia without increasing the risk of weaning failure or reintubation. In subgroup analyses, mortality benefits were significantly greater in patients with COPD.
无创通气已被研究用于减少接受有创机械通气撤机患者的并发症。我们旨在总结比较无创和有创撤机及其对死亡率影响的证据。
我们通过数据库、会议记录和灰色文献检索,确定了相关的随机和半随机试验。我们纳入了比较机械通气患者拔管后立即应用无创通气与继续有创撤机的试验。两名评审员分别独立筛选引文、评估试验质量并提取数据。我们的主要结局是死亡率。
我们确定了 16 项涉及 994 名参与者的试验,其中大多数患有慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)。与有创撤机相比,无创撤机显著降低了死亡率(风险比 [RR] 0.53,95%置信区间 [CI] 0.36 至 0.80)、撤机失败率(RR 0.63,95% CI 0.42 至 0.96)、呼吸机相关性肺炎(RR 0.25,95% CI 0.15 至 0.43)、重症监护病房(ICU)住院时间(平均差值 [MD] -5.59 天,95% CI -7.90 至 -3.28)和住院时间(MD -6.04 天,95% CI -9.22 至 -2.87)以及机械通气总时间(MD -5.64 天,95% CI -9.50 至 -1.77)。无创撤机对与撤机相关的通气时间没有显著影响,但显著降低了气管切开术(RR 0.19,95% CI 0.08 至 0.47)和再插管(RR 0.65,95% CI 0.44 至 0.97)的发生率。在纳入 COPD 患者的试验中,死亡率获益明显大于纳入混合患者人群的试验(RR 0.36 [95% CI 0.24 至 0.56] v. RR 0.81 [95% CI 0.47 至 1.40])。
无创撤机可降低死亡率和肺炎发生率,而不会增加撤机失败或再插管的风险。在亚组分析中,COPD 患者的死亡率获益明显更大。