Bateman Scot T, Borasino Santiago, Asaro Lisa A, Cheifetz Ira M, Diane Shelley, Wypij David, Curley Martha A Q
1 Department of Pediatrics, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts.
2 Department of Pediatrics, University of Alabama, Birmingham, Alabama.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2016 Mar 1;193(5):495-503. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201507-1381OC.
The use of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) for acute respiratory failure in children is prevalent despite the lack of efficacy data.
To compare the outcomes of patients with acute respiratory failure managed with HFOV within 24-48 hours of endotracheal intubation with those receiving conventional mechanical ventilation (CMV) and/or late HFOV.
This is a secondary analysis of data from the RESTORE (Randomized Evaluation of Sedation Titration for Respiratory Failure) study, a prospective cluster randomized clinical trial conducted between 2009 and 2013 in 31 U.S. pediatric intensive care units. Propensity score analysis, including degree of hypoxia in the model, compared the duration of mechanical ventilation and mortality of patients treated with early HFOV matched with those treated with CMV/late HFOV.
Among 2,449 subjects enrolled in RESTORE, 353 patients (14%) were ever supported on HFOV, of which 210 (59%) had HFOV initiated within 24-48 hours of intubation. The propensity score model predicting the probability of receiving early HFOV included 1,064 patients (181 early HFOV vs. 883 CMV/late HFOV) with significant hypoxia (oxygenation index ≥ 8). The degree of hypoxia was the most significant contributor to the propensity score model. After adjusting for risk category, early HFOV use was associated with a longer duration of mechanical ventilation (hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-0.89; P = 0.001) but not with mortality (odds ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-1.79; P = 0.15) compared with CMV/late HFOV.
In adjusted models including important oxygenation variables, early HFOV was associated with a longer duration of mechanical ventilation. These analyses make supporting the current approach to HFOV less convincing.
尽管缺乏疗效数据,但高频振荡通气(HFOV)在儿童急性呼吸衰竭治疗中的应用依然普遍。
比较在气管插管后24至48小时内接受HFOV治疗的急性呼吸衰竭患者与接受传统机械通气(CMV)和/或晚期HFOV治疗的患者的治疗结果。
这是对RESTORE(呼吸衰竭镇静滴定随机评估)研究数据的二次分析,该研究是一项前瞻性整群随机临床试验,于2009年至2013年在美国31个儿科重症监护病房进行。倾向评分分析,包括模型中的缺氧程度,比较了早期接受HFOV治疗的患者与接受CMV/晚期HFOV治疗的患者的机械通气时间和死亡率。
在RESTORE研究纳入的2449名受试者中,353例患者(14%)曾接受HFOV支持,其中210例(59%)在插管后24至48小时内开始使用HFOV。预测接受早期HFOV概率的倾向评分模型纳入了1064例患者(181例早期HFOV vs. 883例CMV/晚期HFOV),这些患者存在明显缺氧(氧合指数≥8)。缺氧程度是倾向评分模型中最显著的因素。在调整风险类别后,与CMV/晚期HFOV相比,早期使用HFOV与机械通气时间延长相关(风险比,0.75;95%置信区间,0.64 - 0.89;P = 0.001),但与死亡率无关(优势比,1.28;95%置信区间,0.92 - 1.79;P = 0.15)。
在包含重要氧合变量的调整模型中,早期HFOV与机械通气时间延长相关。这些分析使得支持当前HFOV的应用方法的说服力降低。