Tomlinson J R, Miller K S, Lorch D G, Smith L, Reines H D, Sahn S A
Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston 29425.
Chest. 1989 Aug;96(2):348-52. doi: 10.1378/chest.96.2.348.
Two hundred (200) consecutive medical and surgical patients requiring mechanical ventilation were entered into a prospective randomized trial of weaning by either intermittent mandatory ventilation (IMV) or T-piece. Patients in these groups were of similar age and sex and had the same total ventilation time (TVT). The study design provided equal time for each weaning mode after specific criteria for oxygenation and ventilation were satisfied (PaO2 greater than 55 mm Hg on FIO2 less than 0.5; VE less than 12 L/min and two of the following four parameters: MVV greater than 2 VE, VT greater than 5 ml/kg, FVC greater than 10 ml/kg, NIF less than or equal to -20 cm H2O). Of the original 200 patients 165 were entered into the weaning phase; 35 patients were withdrawn prior to weaning due to the discretion of the attending physician or protocol error. Weaning time was not different between the IMV (5.3 +/- 1.2 h, mean +/- SEM) and T-piece groups (5.9 +/- 1.4 h, p = NS). Of the 165 patients, 155 (93 percent) were weaned successfully by protocol, 79 in the IMV and 76 in the T-piece group. Of 155 patients, 136 (88 percent) were weaned on the first attempt by protocol. Of the 19 who were not weaned, 11 were weaned successfully on the second and five on the third trial; three patients required three-day weans. We conclude that clinically stable patients who require short-term mechanical ventilation and meet standard bedside weaning criteria can be weaned efficiently by protocol using either IMV or T-piece techniques.
200例连续的需要机械通气的内科和外科患者进入了一项前瞻性随机试验,比较间歇指令通气(IMV)和T形管撤机的效果。这些组中的患者年龄和性别相似,总通气时间(TVT)相同。在满足氧合和通气的特定标准(FIO2小于0.5时PaO2大于55 mmHg;VE小于12 L/min且以下四个参数中的两个:MVV大于2 VE、VT大于5 ml/kg、FVC大于10 ml/kg、NIF小于或等于-20 cm H2O)后,研究设计为每种撤机模式提供了相等的时间。在最初的200例患者中,165例进入撤机阶段;35例患者在撤机前因主治医师的判断或方案错误而退出。IMV组(5.3±1.2小时,平均值±标准误)和T形管组(5.9±1.4小时,p=无显著性差异)的撤机时间没有差异。在165例患者中,155例(93%)按方案成功撤机,IMV组79例,T形管组76例。在155例患者中,136例(88%)按方案首次尝试撤机成功。在19例未撤机的患者中,11例在第二次尝试时成功撤机,5例在第三次尝试时成功撤机;3例患者需要三天撤机。我们得出结论,临床上稳定且需要短期机械通气并符合标准床边撤机标准的患者可以通过使用IMV或T形管技术按方案有效地撤机。