Guo Lei, Wang Weiwei, Zhao Nana, Guo Libo, Chi Chunjie, Hou Wei, Wu Anqi, Tong Hongshuang, Wang Yue, Wang Changsong, Li Enyou
Department of Anesthesiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, No 23 Youzheng St., Nangang District, Harbin, Heilongjiang, 150001, China.
Crit Care. 2016 Jul 22;20(1):226. doi: 10.1186/s13054-016-1396-0.
It has been shown that the application of a lung-protective mechanical ventilation strategy can improve the prognosis of patients with acute lung injury (ALI) or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, the optimal mechanical ventilation strategy for intensive care unit (ICU) patients without ALI or ARDS is uncertain. Therefore, we performed a network meta-analysis to identify the optimal mechanical ventilation strategy for these patients.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Web of Science for studies published up to July 2015 in which pulmonary compliance or the partial pressure of arterial oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FIO2) ratio was assessed in ICU patients without ALI or ARDS, who received mechanical ventilation via different strategies. The data for study characteristics, methods, and outcomes were extracted. We assessed the studies for eligibility, extracted the data, pooled the data, and used a Bayesian fixed-effects model to combine direct comparisons with indirect evidence.
Seventeen randomized controlled trials including a total of 575 patients who received one of six ventilation strategies were included for network meta-analysis. Among ICU patients without ALI or ARDS, strategy C (lower tidal volume (VT) + higher positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP)) resulted in the highest PaO2/FIO2 ratio; strategy B (higher VT + lower PEEP) was associated with the highest pulmonary compliance; strategy A (lower VT + lower PEEP) was associated with a shorter length of ICU stay; and strategy D (lower VT + zero end-expiratory pressure (ZEEP)) was associated with the lowest PaO2/FiO2 ratio and pulmonary compliance.
For ICU patients without ALI or ARDS, strategy C (lower VT + higher PEEP) was associated with the highest PaO2/FiO2 ratio. Strategy B (higher VT + lower PEEP) was superior to the other strategies in improving pulmonary compliance. Strategy A (lower VT + lower PEEP) was associated with a shorter length of ICU stay, whereas strategy D (lower VT + ZEEP) was associated with the lowest PaO2/FiO2 ratio and pulmonary compliance.
研究表明,应用肺保护性机械通气策略可改善急性肺损伤(ALI)或急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)患者的预后。然而,对于没有ALI或ARDS的重症监护病房(ICU)患者,最佳机械通气策略尚不确定。因此,我们进行了一项网状Meta分析,以确定这些患者的最佳机械通气策略。
我们检索了Cochrane图书馆中的Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)、EMBASE、MEDLINE、CINAHL和科学网,以查找截至2015年7月发表的研究,这些研究评估了接受不同策略机械通气的无ALI或ARDS的ICU患者的肺顺应性或动脉血氧分压/吸入氧分数(PaO2/FIO2)比值。提取研究特征、方法和结果的数据。我们评估研究的纳入资格,提取数据,汇总数据,并使用贝叶斯固定效应模型将直接比较与间接证据相结合。
17项随机对照试验纳入网状Meta分析,共575例接受六种通气策略之一的患者。在没有ALI或ARDS的ICU患者中,策略C(低潮气量(VT)+高呼气末正压(PEEP))导致最高的PaO2/FIO2比值;策略B(高潮气量+低PEEP)与最高的肺顺应性相关;策略A(低潮气量+低PEEP)与较短的ICU住院时间相关;策略D(低潮气量+呼气末零压力(ZEEP))与最低的PaO2/FiO2比值和肺顺应性相关。
对于没有ALI或ARDS的ICU患者,策略C(低潮气量+高PEEP)与最高的PaO2/FiO2比值相关。策略B(高潮气量+低PEEP)在改善肺顺应性方面优于其他策略。策略A(低潮气量+低PEEP)与较短的ICU住院时间相关,而策略D(低潮气量+ZEEP)与最低的PaO2/FiO2比值和肺顺应性相关。