Tejerina Eva E, Robba Chiara, Del Campo-Albendea Laura, Pelosi Paolo, Muriel Alfonso, Peñuelas Oscar, Frutos-Vivar Fernando, Raymondos Konstantinos, Du Bin, Thille Arnaud W, Ríos Fernando, González Marco, Del-Sorbo Lorenzo, Marín Maria Del Carmen, Valle Pinheiro Bruno, Soares Marco Antonio, Nin Nicolas, Maggiore Salvatore M, Bersten Andrew, Amin Pravin, Cakar Nahit, Young Suh Gee, Abroug Fekri, Jibaja Manuel, Matamis Dimitros, Ali Zeggwagh Amine, Sutherasan Yuda, Anzueto Antonio, Esteban Andrés
Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Universitario de Getafe, Carretera de Toledo, km 12.5, 28905, Getafe, Spain.
Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Respiratorias, Barcelona, Spain.
Neurocrit Care. 2022 Dec;37(3):649-659. doi: 10.1007/s12028-022-01584-2. Epub 2022 Sep 1.
Despite the need for specific weaning strategies in neurological patients, evidence is generally insufficient or lacking. We aimed to describe the evolution over time of weaning and extubation practices in patients with acute brain injury compared with patients who are mechanically ventilated (MV) due to other reasons.
We performed a secondary analysis of three prospective, observational, multicenter international studies conducted in 2004, 2010, and 2016 in adults who had need of invasive MV for more than 12 h. We collected data on baseline characteristics, variables related to management ventilator settings, and complications while patients were ventilated or until day 28.
Among the 20,929 patients enrolled, we included 12,618 (60%) who started the weaning from MV, of whom 1722 (14%) were patients with acute brain injury. In the acutely brain-injured cohort, 538 patients (31%) did not undergo planned extubation, defined as the need for a tracheostomy without an attempt of extubation, accidental extubation, and death. Among the 1184 planned extubated patients with acute brain injury, 202 required reintubation (17%). Patients with acute brain injury had a higher odds for unplanned extubation (odds ratio [OR] 1.35, confidence interval for 95% [CI 95%] 1.19-1.54; p < 0.001), a higher odds of failure after the first attempt of weaning (spontaneous breathing trial or gradual reduction of ventilatory support; OR 1.14 [CI 95% 1.01-1.30; p = 0.03]), and a higher odds for reintubation (OR 1.41 [CI 95% 1.20-1.66; p < 0.001]) than patients without brain injury. Patients with hemorrhagic stroke had the highest odds for unplanned extubation (OR 1.47 [CI 95% 1.22-1.77; p < 0.001]), of failed extubation after the first attempt of weaning (OR 1.28 [CI 95% 1.06-1.55; p = 0.009]), and for reintubation (OR 1.49 [CI 95% 1.17-1.88; p < 0.001]). In relation to weaning evolution over time in patients with acute brain injury, the risk for unplanned extubation showed a downward trend; the risk for reintubation was not associated to time; and there was a significant increase in the percentage of patients who underwent extubation after the first attempt of weaning from MV.
Patients with acute brain injury, compared with patients without brain injury, present higher odds of undergoing unplanned extubated after weaning was started, lower odds of being extubated after the first attempt, and a higher risk of reintubation.
尽管神经科患者需要特定的撤机策略,但相关证据通常不足或缺乏。我们旨在描述急性脑损伤患者与因其他原因接受机械通气(MV)的患者相比,撤机和拔管实践随时间的演变情况。
我们对2004年、2010年和2016年在需要有创MV超过12小时的成年人中进行的三项前瞻性、观察性、多中心国际研究进行了二次分析。我们收集了关于基线特征、与管理呼吸机设置相关的变量以及患者通气期间或直至第28天的并发症的数据。
在纳入的20929例患者中,我们纳入了12618例(60%)开始撤机的患者,其中1722例(14%)为急性脑损伤患者。在急性脑损伤队列中,538例患者(31%)未进行计划拔管,计划拔管定义为需要气管切开、未尝试拔管、意外拔管和死亡。在1184例计划拔管的急性脑损伤患者中,202例需要重新插管(17%)。与无脑损伤的患者相比,急性脑损伤患者非计划拔管的几率更高(优势比[OR]1.35,95%置信区间[CI 95%]1.19 - 1.54;p < 0.001),首次撤机尝试失败(自主呼吸试验或逐渐减少通气支持)的几率更高(OR 1.14 [CI 95% 1.01 - 1.30;p = 0.03]),重新插管的几率更高(OR 1.41 [CI 95% 1.20 - 1.66;p < 0.001])。出血性中风患者非计划拔管的几率最高(OR 1.47 [CI 95% 1.22 - 1.77;p < 0.001]),首次撤机尝试后拔管失败的几率最高(OR 1.28 [CI 95% 1.06 - 1.55;p = 0.009]),重新插管的几率最高(OR 1.49 [CI 95% 1.17 - 1.88;p < 0.001])。关于急性脑损伤患者随时间的撤机演变情况,非计划拔管的风险呈下降趋势;重新插管的风险与时间无关;首次撤机尝试后进行拔管的患者百分比有显著增加。
与无脑损伤的患者相比,急性脑损伤患者在开始撤机后非计划拔管的几率更高,首次尝试后拔管的几率更低,重新插管的风险更高。