1 Department of Pharmacy Practice, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences College of Pharmacy, Little Rock, AR, USA.
2 Department of Pharmacy, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, USA.
J Intensive Care Med. 2019 Jan;34(1):34-39. doi: 10.1177/0885066616686052. Epub 2016 Dec 27.
: To determine whether etomidate use before intubation increased development of hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) in critically ill, nontrauma patients.
: A single-center, retrospective, cohort study of critically ill, nontrauma patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit (ICU) from 2012 to 2015 and intubated with or without etomidate was conducted. Demographics, comorbidities, primary diagnosis, critical illness scores, concomitant medications, and outcomes were obtained from medical records. Student t, chi-square, and Fisher exact tests were performed as appropriate. Relevant characteristics were modeled using logistic regression techniques to determine whether any predicted HAP independently.
: Of the 174 patients, 94 (54%) received etomidate and 80 (46%) did not. There was no difference in HAP between etomidate and no etomidate groups (13.8% vs 23.7%, P = .092). Duration of mechanical ventilation (4.4 vs 4.6 days, P = .845), ICU length of stay (7.4 vs 6.9 days, P = .547), ICU mortality (14.9% vs 12.5%, P = .648), and hospital mortality (17% vs 16.2%, P = .892) were similar between the groups. For each 1-day increase in mechanical ventilation duration, the likelihood of HAP development increased by 21%. Patients who received etomidate but no neuromuscular-blocking drug were 80% less likely to develop HAP than those who did not receive etomidate or a neuromuscular-blocking drug (odds ratio: 0.202, 95% confidence interval: 0.045-0.908).
: Etomidate use was not associated with a difference in HAP development in critically ill, nontrauma patients.
确定气管插管前使用依托咪酯是否会增加危重症非创伤患者医院获得性肺炎(HAP)的发生。
这是一项单中心、回顾性队列研究,纳入了 2012 年至 2015 年期间入住重症监护病房(ICU)并接受或未接受依托咪酯气管插管的危重症非创伤患者。从病历中获取患者的人口统计学、合并症、主要诊断、危重症评分、同时使用的药物和结局等数据。适当使用学生 t 检验、卡方检验和 Fisher 确切概率法进行检验。使用逻辑回归技术对相关特征进行建模,以确定是否存在任何预测 HAP 的独立因素。
在 174 例患者中,94 例(54%)接受了依托咪酯,80 例(46%)未接受。依托咪酯组和未用依托咪酯组的 HAP 发生率无差异(13.8%比 23.7%,P=0.092)。机械通气时间(4.4 天比 4.6 天,P=0.845)、ICU 住院时间(7.4 天比 6.9 天,P=0.547)、ICU 死亡率(14.9%比 12.5%,P=0.648)和医院死亡率(17%比 16.2%,P=0.892)在两组间相似。机械通气时间每增加 1 天,HAP 发生的可能性增加 21%。与未接受依托咪酯或神经肌肉阻滞剂的患者相比,接受依托咪酯但未使用神经肌肉阻滞剂的患者发生 HAP 的可能性降低 80%(优势比:0.202,95%置信区间:0.045-0.908)。
在危重症非创伤患者中,依托咪酯的使用与 HAP 发生率的差异无关。