Suppr超能文献

高流量鼻导管与低流量氧气系统相比对拔管后呼吸衰竭及再插管的保护作用:单中心回顾性研究及文献综述

Protecting Postextubation Respiratory Failure and Reintubation by High-Flow Nasal Cannula Compared to Low-Flow Oxygen System: Single Center Retrospective Study and Literature Review.

作者信息

Lee Minhyeok, Kim Ji Hye, Jeong In Beom, Son Ji Woong, Na Moon Jun, Kwon Sun Jung

机构信息

Division of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Konyang University Hospital, Daejeon, Korea.

The 2nd Infantry Division of Republic of Korea Army, Yanggu, Korea.

出版信息

Acute Crit Care. 2019 Feb;34(1):60-70. doi: 10.4266/acc.2018.00311. Epub 2019 Feb 28.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Use of a high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) reduced postextubation respiratory failure (PERF) and reintubation rate compared to use of a low-flow oxygen system (LFOS) in low-risk patients. However, no obvious conclusion was reached for high-risk patients. Here, we sought to present the current status of HFNC use as adjunctive oxygen therapy in a clinical setting and to elucidate the nature of the protective effect following extubation.

METHODS

The medical records of 855 patients who were admitted to the intensive care unit of single university hospital during a period of 5.5 years were analyzed retrospectively, with only 118 patients ultimately included in the present research. The baseline characteristics of these patients and the occurrence of PERF and reintubation along with physiologic changes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Eighty-four patients underwent HFNC, and the remaining 34 patients underwent conventional LFOS after extubation. Physicians preferred HFNC to LFOS in the face of high-risk features including old age, neurologic disease, moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, a long duration of mechanical ventilation, low baseline arterial partial pressure of oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen ratio, and a high baseline alveolar-arterial oxygen difference. The reintubation rate at 72 hours after extubation was not different (9.5% vs. 8.8%; P=1.000). Hypoxic respiratory failure was slightly higher in the nonreintubation group than in the reintubation group (31.9% vs. 6.7%; P=0.058). Regarding physiologic effects, heart rate was only stabilized after 24 hours of extubation in the HFNC group.

CONCLUSIONS

No difference was found in the occurrence of PERF and reintubation between both groups. It is worth noting that similar PERF and reintubation ratios were shown in the HFNC group in those with certain exacerbating risk factors versus not. Caution is needed regarding delayed reintubation in the HFNC group.

摘要

背景

与在低风险患者中使用低流量氧气系统(LFOS)相比,使用高流量鼻导管(HFNC)可降低拔管后呼吸衰竭(PERF)和再插管率。然而,对于高风险患者尚未得出明确结论。在此,我们试图呈现HFNC作为辅助氧疗在临床环境中的使用现状,并阐明拔管后保护作用的本质。

方法

回顾性分析了一所大学医院重症监护病房5.5年间收治的855例患者的病历,最终本研究仅纳入118例患者。分析了这些患者的基线特征、PERF和再插管的发生情况以及生理变化。

结果

84例患者接受了HFNC,其余34例患者拔管后接受了传统的LFOS。面对包括老年、神经系统疾病、中度至重度慢性阻塞性肺疾病、机械通气时间长、低基线动脉血氧分压与吸入氧分数比以及高基线肺泡 - 动脉氧分压差等高危特征时,医生更倾向于使用HFNC而非LFOS。拔管后72小时的再插管率无差异(9.5%对8.8%;P = 1.000)。未再插管组的低氧性呼吸衰竭略高于再插管组(31.9%对6.7%;P = 0.058)。关于生理效应,HFNC组在拔管24小时后心率才稳定。

结论

两组之间在PERF和再插管的发生方面未发现差异。值得注意的是,在有某些加重危险因素的患者与无这些因素的患者中,HFNC组的PERF和再插管率相似。对于HFNC组延迟再插管需要谨慎。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验