Department of Medicine, University of Colorado, Aurora.
Department of Surgery, University of California, Davis.
JAMA. 2023 Nov 28;330(20):1982-1990. doi: 10.1001/jama.2023.21739.
Among patients receiving mechanical ventilation, tidal volumes with each breath are often constant or similar. This may lead to ventilator-induced lung injury by altering or depleting surfactant. The role of sigh breaths in reducing ventilator-induced lung injury among trauma patients at risk of poor outcomes is unknown.
To determine whether adding sigh breaths improves clinical outcomes.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A pragmatic, randomized trial of sigh breaths plus usual care conducted from 2016 to 2022 with 28-day follow-up in 15 academic trauma centers in the US. Inclusion criteria were age older than 18 years, mechanical ventilation because of trauma for less than 24 hours, 1 or more of 5 risk factors for developing acute respiratory distress syndrome, expected duration of ventilation longer than 24 hours, and predicted survival longer than 48 hours.
Sigh volumes producing plateau pressures of 35 cm H2O (or 40 cm H2O for inpatients with body mass indexes >35) delivered once every 6 minutes. Usual care was defined as the patient's physician(s) treating the patient as they wished.
The primary outcome was ventilator-free days. Prespecified secondary outcomes included all-cause 28-day mortality.
Of 5753 patients screened, 524 were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 43.9 [19.2] years; 394 [75.2%] were male). The median ventilator-free days was 18.4 (IQR, 7.0-25.2) in patients randomized to sighs and 16.1 (IQR, 1.1-24.4) in those receiving usual care alone (P = .08). The unadjusted mean difference in ventilator-free days between groups was 1.9 days (95% CI, 0.1 to 3.6) and the prespecified adjusted mean difference was 1.4 days (95% CI, -0.2 to 3.0). For the prespecified secondary outcome, patients randomized to sighs had 28-day mortality of 11.6% (30/259) vs 17.6% (46/261) in those receiving usual care (P = .05). No differences were observed in nonfatal adverse events comparing patients with sighs (80/259 [30.9%]) vs those without (80/261 [30.7%]).
In a pragmatic, randomized trial among trauma patients receiving mechanical ventilation with risk factors for developing acute respiratory distress syndrome, the addition of sigh breaths did not significantly increase ventilator-free days. Prespecified secondary outcome data suggest that sighs are well-tolerated and may improve clinical outcomes.
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02582957.
在接受机械通气的患者中,每次呼吸的潮气量通常是恒定或相似的。这可能通过改变或耗尽表面活性剂来导致呼吸机引起的肺损伤。在有发生不良预后风险的创伤患者中,叹息呼吸在减少呼吸机引起的肺损伤中的作用尚不清楚。
确定添加叹息呼吸是否能改善临床结果。
设计、设置和参与者:这是一项在 2016 年至 2022 年期间在美国 15 个学术创伤中心进行的、具有叹息呼吸加常规护理的实用性随机试验,在 28 天的随访中,患者的机械通气时间不到 24 小时,有 1 个或多个发生急性呼吸窘迫综合征的风险因素,预计通气时间超过 24 小时,预计存活时间超过 48 小时。
每次输送 35 cm H2O(或 BMI 大于 35 的住院患者输送 40 cm H2O)的叹息量,每 6 分钟输送一次。常规护理定义为患者的医生(们)按照他们的意愿治疗患者。
主要结果是无呼吸机天数。预先规定的次要结果包括全因 28 天死亡率。
在 5753 名被筛选的患者中,有 524 名患者入组(平均[标准差]年龄为 43.9[19.2]岁;394[75.2%]为男性)。随机分配到叹息组的患者无呼吸机天数中位数为 18.4(IQR,7.0-25.2),单独接受常规护理的患者为 16.1(IQR,1.1-24.4)(P=0.08)。组间无呼吸机天数的未调整平均差异为 1.9 天(95%CI,0.1 至 3.6),预先规定的调整平均差异为 1.4 天(95%CI,-0.2 至 3.0)。对于预先规定的次要结果,随机分配到叹息组的患者 28 天死亡率为 11.6%(30/259),而接受常规护理的患者为 17.6%(46/261)(P=0.05)。与未接受叹息的患者(80/259[30.7%])相比,接受叹息的患者(80/259[30.9%])在非致命性不良事件方面没有差异。
在一项针对接受机械通气且有发生急性呼吸窘迫综合征风险因素的创伤患者的实用性、随机试验中,添加叹息呼吸并没有显著增加无呼吸机天数。预先规定的次要结果数据表明,叹息是可以耐受的,并且可能改善临床结果。
ClinicalTrials.gov 标识符:NCT02582957。