Service de réanimation, groupe hospitalier Pitié-Salpêtrière, Assistance publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, 75013 Paris, France.
Hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, pôle d'anesthésie-réanimation chirurgicale, SAMU, SMUR, NHC, 1, place de l'Hôpital, 67000 Strasbourg, France; EA 3072, FMTS université de Strasbourg, 67000 Strasbourg, France.
Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2018 Jun;37(3):281-294. doi: 10.1016/j.accpm.2018.02.012. Epub 2018 Mar 17.
Tracheotomy is widely used in intensive care units, albeit with great disparities between medical teams in terms of frequency and modality. Indications and techniques are, however, associated with variable levels of evidence based on inhomogeneous or even contradictory literature. Our aim was to conduct a systematic analysis of the published data in order to provide guidelines. We present herein recommendations for the use of tracheotomy in adult critically ill patients developed using the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) method. These guidelines were conducted by a group of experts from the French Intensive Care Society (Société de réanimation de langue française) and the French Society of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine (Société francaise d'anesthésie réanimation) with the participation of the French Emergency Medicine Association (Société française de médecine d'urgence), the French Society of Otorhinolaryngology. Sixteen experts and two coordinators agreed to consider questions concerning tracheotomy and its practical implementation. Five topics were defined: indications and contraindications for tracheotomy in intensive care, tracheotomy techniques in intensive care, modalities of tracheotomy in intensive care, management of patients undergoing tracheotomy in intensive care, and decannulation in intensive care. The summary made by the experts and the application of GRADE methodology led to the drawing up of 8 formal guidelines, 10 recommendations, and 3 treatment protocols. Among the 8 formal guidelines, 2 have a high level of proof (Grade 1±) and 6 a low level of proof (Grade 2±). For the 10 recommendations, GRADE methodology was not applicable and instead 10 expert opinions were produced.
气管切开术在重症监护病房中被广泛应用,尽管医疗团队在使用频率和方式上存在很大差异。然而,适应证和技术与基于证据的水平相关,这些证据基于不均匀甚至矛盾的文献。我们的目的是对已发表的数据进行系统分析,以便提供指导方针。我们在此介绍了使用 GRADE 方法制定的关于成人危重症患者气管切开术使用的建议。这些指南是由法国重症监护学会(Société de réanimation de langue française)和法国麻醉与重症监护医学学会(Société francaise d'anesthésie réanimation)的一组专家以及法国急诊医学协会(Société française de médecine d'urgence)、法国耳鼻喉科学会(Société française d'oto-rhino-laryngologie)共同制定的,有 16 名专家和 2 名协调员参与了制定。16 名专家和 2 名协调员同意考虑有关气管切开术及其实际实施的问题。确定了五个主题:重症监护中的气管切开术适应证和禁忌证、重症监护中的气管切开术技术、重症监护中的气管切开术方式、重症监护中接受气管切开术的患者的管理、重症监护中的拔管。专家总结和 GRADE 方法的应用导致制定了 8 项正式指南、10 项建议和 3 项治疗方案。在 8 项正式指南中,有 2 项具有较高的证据水平(1±级),6 项具有较低的证据水平(2±级)。对于 10 项建议,GRADE 方法不适用,而是提出了 10 项专家意见。