Suppr超能文献

插管的新冠肺炎患者俯卧位与仰卧位通气:系统评价与荟萃分析

Prone Vs. Supine Position Ventilation in Intubated COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

作者信息

Fayed Mohamed, Maroun Wissam, Elnahla Ahmed, Yeldo Nicholas, Was Jessica R, Penning Donald H

机构信息

Anesthesiology, Pain Management and Perioperative Medicine, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, USA.

出版信息

Cureus. 2023 May 29;15(5):e39636. doi: 10.7759/cureus.39636. eCollection 2023 May.

Abstract

Whether prone positioning of patients undergoing mechanical ventilation for COVID-19 pneumonia has benefits over supine positioning is not clear. We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis to determine whether prone versus supine positioning during ventilation resulted in different outcomes for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. We searched Ovid Medline, Embase, and Web of Science for prospective and retrospective studies up through April 2023. We included studies that compared outcomes of patients with COVID-19 after ventilation in prone and supine positions. The primary outcomes were three mortality measures: hospital, overall, and intensive care unit (ICU). Secondary outcomes were mechanical ventilation days, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, and hospital length of stay. We conducted risk of bias analysis and used meta-analysis software to analyze results. Mean difference (MD) was used for continuous data, and odds ratio (OR) was used for dichotomous data, both with 95% CIs. Significant heterogeneity (I) was considered if I was >50%. A statistically significant result was considered if the p-value was <0.05. Of 1787 articles identified, 93 were retrieved, and seven retrospective cohort studies encompassing 5216 patients with COVID-19 were analyzed. ICU mortality was significantly higher in the prone group (OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.43-3.43; p=0.0004). No statistically significant difference was observed between prone and supine groups for hospital mortality (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.66-1.37; p=0.78) or overall mortality (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.72-1.64; p=0.71). Studies that analyzed primary outcomes had significant heterogeneity. Hospital length of stay was significantly higher in the prone than in the supine group (MD, 6.06; 95 % CI, 3.15-8.97; p<0.0001). ICU length of stay and days of mechanical ventilation did not differ between the two groups. In conclusion, mechanical ventilation with prone positioning for all patients with COVID-19 pneumonia may not provide a mortality benefit over supine positioning.

摘要

对于新型冠状病毒肺炎(COVID-19肺炎)患者,机械通气时俯卧位是否比仰卧位更有益尚不清楚。我们进行了一项系统评价和荟萃分析,以确定通气期间俯卧位与仰卧位相比,COVID-19肺炎患者的结局是否不同。我们在Ovid Medline、Embase和Web of Science中检索了截至2023年4月的前瞻性和回顾性研究。我们纳入了比较COVID-19患者通气后俯卧位和仰卧位结局的研究。主要结局是三项死亡率指标:医院死亡率、总体死亡率和重症监护病房(ICU)死亡率。次要结局是机械通气天数、ICU住院时间和住院时间。我们进行了偏倚风险分析,并使用荟萃分析软件分析结果。连续数据使用平均差(MD),二分数据使用比值比(OR),均带有95%置信区间(CI)。如果I²>50%,则认为存在显著异质性。如果p值<0.05,则认为结果具有统计学意义。在检索到的1787篇文章中,93篇被纳入,分析了7项回顾性队列研究,共纳入5216例COVID-19患者。俯卧位组的ICU死亡率显著更高(OR 2.22,95%CI 1.43 - 3.43;p = 0.0004)。俯卧位组和仰卧位组在医院死亡率(OR,0.95;95%CI,0.66 - 1.37;p = 0.78)或总体死亡率(OR,1.08;95%CI,0.72 - 1.64;p = 0.71)方面未观察到统计学显著差异。分析主要结局的研究存在显著异质性。俯卧位组的住院时间显著长于仰卧位组(MD,6.06;95%CI,3.15 - 8.97;p<0.0001)。两组的ICU住院时间和机械通气天数没有差异。总之,对于所有COVID-19肺炎患者,机械通气时采用俯卧位可能不会比仰卧位在降低死亡率方面更有益。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e5fd/10305786/625a34072223/cureus-0015-00000039636-i01.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验