Letvin Adam, Kremer Pamala, Silver Patty C, Samih Nizama, Reed-Watts Peggy, Kollef Marin H
Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri.
Hospital Epidemiology and Infection Prevention Department, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St Louis, Missouri.
Respir Care. 2018 May;63(5):495-501. doi: 10.4187/respcare.05926. Epub 2018 Jan 30.
Currently there is no accepted standard of practice for the optimal frequency of endotracheal tube cuff pressure monitoring in mechanically ventilated patients. Therefore, we conducted a study to compare infrequent endotracheal tube cuff pressure monitoring (immediately after intubation and when clinically indicated for an observed air leak or due to tube migration) with frequent endotracheal tube cuff pressure monitoring (immediately after intubation, every 8 h, and when clinically indicated).
We performed a prospective clinical trial with subjects assigned to study groups based on room assignment. The primary outcome was the occurrence of a ventilator-associated event (VAE) and was adjudicated by individuals blinded to the conduct of this study.
We enrolled 305 subjects, with 166 (54.4%) assigned to frequent monitoring and 139 (45.6%) assigned to infrequent monitoring. The total number of endotracheal tube cuff pressure monitoring events for both groups was 1,531 versus 336, respectively. The occurrence of VAEs was infrequent and similar for both groups (3.6% vs 5.8%, = .37). Witnessed aspiration events (0.6% vs 0%, = .36), ventilator-associated pneumonia (0% vs 0.7%, = .27), 30-d mortality (31.3% vs 30.2%, = .83), and hospital length of stay (10 d [6 d, 21 d] vs 11 d [6 d, 21 d], = .34) were also similar for both study groups. The 30-d hospital readmission rate was statistically lower for the group that received infrequent monitoring (15.1% vs 6.5%, = .02).
More frequent cuff pressure monitoring was not associated with any identifiable clinical outcome benefit.
目前,对于机械通气患者气管内导管套囊压力监测的最佳频率,尚无公认的实践标准。因此,我们开展了一项研究,比较不频繁的气管内导管套囊压力监测(插管后即刻以及临床出现明显漏气或导管移位时)与频繁的气管内导管套囊压力监测(插管后即刻、每8小时一次以及临床出现指征时)。
我们进行了一项前瞻性临床试验,根据病房分配将受试者分组。主要结局是呼吸机相关事件(VAE)的发生情况,由对本研究实施不知情的人员进行判定。
我们纳入了305名受试者,其中166名(54.4%)被分配至频繁监测组,139名(45.6%)被分配至不频繁监测组。两组气管内导管套囊压力监测事件的总数分别为1531次和336次。两组VAE的发生率均较低且相似(3.6%对5.8%,P = 0.37)。两组的目击误吸事件(0.6%对0%,P = 0.36)、呼吸机相关性肺炎(0%对0.7%,P = 0.27)、30天死亡率(31.3%对30.2%,P = 0.83)以及住院时间(10天[6天,21天]对11天[6天,21天],P = 0.34)也相似。不频繁监测组的30天再入院率在统计学上较低(15.1%对6.5%,P = 0.02)。
更频繁的套囊压力监测未显示出任何可识别的临床结局获益。