Réginault Thomas, Martinez Alejos Roberto, Coueron Roxane, Burle Jean-François, Boyer Alexandre, Frison Eric, Vargas Frédéric
Department of Critical Care Medicine and Anesthesiology, Bordeaux University Hospital and School of Medicine, Bordeaux, France.
Medical Intensive Care Unit, Hôpital Pellegrin, Centre Universitaire de Bordeaux, Place Amélie Raba Léon, 33000, Bordeaux, France.
J Intensive Care. 2024 Jul 25;12(1):28. doi: 10.1186/s40560-024-00741-3.
Inspiratory muscle training (IMT) is well-established as a safe option for combating inspiratory muscles weakness in the intensive care setting. It could improve inspiratory muscle strength and decrease weaning duration but a lack of knowledge on the optimal training regimen raise to inconsistent results. We made the hypothesis that an innovative mixed intensity program for both endurance and strength improvement could be more effective. We conducted a multicentre randomised controlled parallel trial comparing the impacts of three IMT protocols (low, high, and mixed intensity) on inspiratory muscle strength and endurance among difficult-to-wean patients.
Ninety-two patients were randomly assigned to three groups with different training programs, where each performed an IMT program twice daily, 7 days per week, from inclusion until successful extubation or 30 days. The primary outcome was maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP) increase. Secondary outcomes included peak pressure (Ppk) increase as an endurance marker, mechanical ventilation (MV) duration, ICU length of stay, weaning success defined by a 2-day ventilator-free after extubation, reintubation rate and safety.
MIP increases were 10.8 ± 11.9 cmHO, 4.5 ± 14.8 cmHO, and 6.7 ± 14.5 cmHO for the mixed intensity (MI), low intensity (LI), and high intensity (HI) groups, respectively. There was a non-statistically difference between the MI and LI groups (mean adjusted difference: 6.59, 97.5% CI [- 14.36; 1.18], p = 0.056); there was no difference between the MI and HI groups (mean adjusted difference: - 3.52, 97.5% CI [- 11.57; 4.53], p = 0.321). No significant differences in Ppk increase were observed among the three groups. Weaning success rate observed in MI, HI and LI group were 83.7% [95% CI 69.3; 93.2], 82.6% [95% CI 61.2; 95.0] and 73.9% [95% CI 51.6; 89.8], respectively. MV duration, ICU length of stay and reintubation rate had similar values. Over 629 IMT sessions, six adverse events including four spontaneously reversible bradycardia in LI group were possibly related to the study.
Among difficult-to-wean patients receiving invasive MV, no statistically difference was observed in strength and endurance progression across three different IMT programs. IMT appears to be feasible in usual cares, but some serious adverse events such as bradycardia could motivate further research on the specific impact on cardiac system. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02855619. Registered 28 September 2014.
吸气肌训练(IMT)作为重症监护环境中对抗吸气肌无力的一种安全选择已得到充分确立。它可以提高吸气肌力量并缩短撤机时间,但由于缺乏关于最佳训练方案的知识,导致结果不一致。我们提出假设,一种创新的同时提高耐力和力量的混合强度方案可能更有效。我们进行了一项多中心随机对照平行试验,比较三种IMT方案(低强度、高强度和混合强度)对难以撤机患者吸气肌力量和耐力的影响。
92例患者被随机分配到三个不同训练方案的组中,每组从纳入研究开始至成功拔管或30天期间,每周7天,每天进行两次IMT方案。主要结局是最大吸气压力(MIP)的增加。次要结局包括作为耐力指标的峰值压力(Ppk)增加、机械通气(MV)时间、重症监护病房(ICU)住院时间、拔管后无呼吸机支持2天定义的撤机成功率、再插管率和安全性。
混合强度(MI)组、低强度(LI)组和高强度(HI)组的MIP增加分别为10.8±11.9cmH₂O、4.5±14.8cmH₂O和6.7±14.5cmH₂O。MI组和LI组之间无统计学差异(平均校正差异:6.59,97.5%CI[-14.36;1.18],p=0.056);MI组和HI组之间无差异(平均校正差异:-3.52,97.5%CI[-11.57;4.53],p=0.321)。三组之间在Ppk增加方面未观察到显著差异。MI组、HI组和LI组的撤机成功率分别为83.7%[95%CI 69.3;93.2]、82.6%[95%CI 61.2;95.0]和73.9%[95%CI 51.6;89.8]。MV时间、ICU住院时间和再插管率的值相似。在629次IMT训练中,包括LI组4例自发可逆性心动过缓在内的6例不良事件可能与研究有关。
在接受有创MV的难以撤机患者中,三种不同的IMT方案在力量和耐力进展方面未观察到统计学差异。IMT在常规护理中似乎是可行的,但一些严重不良事件如心动过缓可能促使进一步研究其对心脏系统的具体影响。试验注册Clinicaltrials.gov标识符:NCT02855619。2014年9月28日注册。