Pharmacy Department, Hôpital du Sacré-Cœur-de-Montréal, 5400 Boul Gouin O, Montreal, QC, H4J 1C5, Canada.
Research Center, Hôpital du Sacré-Cœur-de-Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Can J Anaesth. 2019 Mar;66(3):318-327. doi: 10.1007/s12630-018-01289-1. Epub 2019 Jan 23.
Delirium, agitation, and anxiety may hinder weaning from mechanical ventilation and lead to increased morbidity and healthcare costs. The most appropriate clinical approach to weaning in these contexts remains unclear and challenging to clinicians. The objective of this systematic review was to identify effective and safe interventions to wean patients that are difficult-to-wean from mechanical ventilation due to delirium, agitation, or anxiety.
A systematic review was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed. Studies evaluating mechanically ventilated patients deemed difficult-to-wean due to delirium, agitation, or anxiety, and comparing the effects of an intervention with a comparator arm were sought. Time-to-extubation was the primary outcome while the secondary outcome was intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay.
From 10,860 studies identified, eight met the inclusion criteria: six studies assessed dexmedetomidine while the remaining two assessed loxapine and biofeedback. Pooled analysis of studies assessing dexmedetomidine showed reduced time-to-extubation (six studies, n = 303) by 10.9 hr compared with controls (95% confidence interval [CI], -15.7 to -6.1; I = 68%) and ICU length of stay (four studies, n = 191) by 2.6 days (95% CI, 1.9 to 3.3; I = 0%). Nevertheless, the evidence was deemed to be of low quality given the small sample sizes and high heterogeneity. Studies assessing other interventions did not identify improvements compared with controls. Safety assessment was globally poorly reported.
This systematic review and meta-analysis provides low quality evidence to suggest the use of dexmedetomidine in patients deemed difficult-to-wean due to agitation, delirium, or anxiety. Insufficient evidence was found regarding other interventions to provide any recommendation.
PROSPERO (CRD42016042528); registered 15 July, 2016.
谵妄、躁动和焦虑可能会妨碍机械通气的撤机,并导致发病率和医疗保健费用增加。在这些情况下,最适合的撤机临床方法仍然不清楚,对临床医生来说具有挑战性。本系统评价的目的是确定有效和安全的干预措施,以帮助那些因谵妄、躁动或焦虑而难以撤机的患者撤机。
使用 MEDLINE、EMBASE 和 PubMed 进行系统评价。研究人员寻找评估因谵妄、躁动或焦虑而难以撤机的机械通气患者,并将干预组与对照组的效果进行比较的研究。拔管时间是主要结局,而 ICU 住院时间是次要结局。
从 10860 项研究中,有 8 项符合纳入标准:6 项研究评估了右美托咪定,其余 2 项研究评估了洛沙平利和生物反馈。评估右美托咪定的研究的汇总分析显示,与对照组相比,拔管时间(6 项研究,n = 303)缩短了 10.9 小时(95%置信区间,-15.7 至-6.1;I = 68%),ICU 住院时间(4 项研究,n = 191)缩短了 2.6 天(95%置信区间,1.9 至 3.3;I = 0%)。然而,由于样本量小且异质性高,证据质量被认为较低。评估其他干预措施的研究未发现与对照组相比有任何改善。安全性评估总体上报告得很差。
本系统评价和荟萃分析提供了低质量的证据,表明在因躁动、谵妄或焦虑而被认为难以撤机的患者中使用右美托咪定。关于其他干预措施,没有足够的证据提供任何建议。
PROSPERO(CRD42016042528);注册于 2016 年 7 月 15 日。