Comparison of Postextubation Complications Between Positive-Pressure and Suctioning Techniques: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND

Several studies have investigated postextubation complications of the positive-pressure and suctioning techniques; however, these studies yielded inconsistent results. Therefore, in this systematic review, we aimed to assess and compare the risk of complications between these techniques after extubation.

METHODS

This study was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021272068). We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) or observational studies that compared positive-pressure and suctioning extubation techniques in medical literature databases. Our search was conducted from the databases' inception to July 7, 2022. The included studies were assessed for quality by using a risk of bias tool.

RESULTS

Six RCTs and 1 non-randomized controlled study were included in this systematic review ( 1,575 subjects), wherein the positive-pressure and suctioning techniques were applied to 762 and 813 subjects, respectively. Three studies were conducted in operating rooms, and 4 studies were conducted in ICUs. Five studies were conducted among adults, and 2 studies were conducted among children or neonates. All the studies except 1 RCT showed that the positive-pressure technique tended to have a lower but not statistically different risk of complications, including desaturation, airway obstruction, pneumonia, aspiration, atelectasis, and re-intubation, than the suctioning technique. Three of the 6 RCTs were determined to have a high risk of bias and the 1 non-randomized controlled study was determined to have a serious risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

The positive-pressure technique tended to have a lower risk of complications than the suctioning technique. Further high-quality studies are warranted.