Suppr超能文献

急性呼吸窘迫综合征中的吸入镇静:SESAR随机临床试验

Inhaled Sedation in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: The SESAR Randomized Clinical Trial.

作者信息

Jabaudon Matthieu, Quenot Jean-Pierre, Badie Julio, Audard Jules, Jaber Samir, Rieu Benjamin, Varillon Caroline, Monsel Antoine, Thouy François, Lorber Julien, Cousson Joël, Bulyez Stéphanie, Bourenne Jérémy, Sboui Ghada, Lhommet Claire, Lemiale Virginie, Bouhemad Belaïd, Brault Clément, Lasocki Sigismond, Legay François, Lebouvier Thomas, Durand Arthur, Pottecher Julien, Conia Alexandre, Brégeaud Delphine, Velly Lionel, Thille Arnaud W, Lambiotte Fabien, L'Her Erwan, Monchi Mehran, Roquilly Antoine, Berrouba Aziz, Verdonk Franck, Chabanne Russell, Godet Thomas, Garnier Marc, Blondonnet Raiko, Vernhes Jérémy, Sapin Vincent, Borao Lucile, Futier Emmanuel, Pereira Bruno, Constantin Jean-Michel

机构信息

Department of Perioperative Medicine, CHU Clermont-Ferrand, Clermont-Ferrand, France.

iGReD, CNRS, INSERM, Université Clermont Auvergne, Clermont-Ferrand, France.

出版信息

JAMA. 2025 May 13;333(18):1608-1617. doi: 10.1001/jama.2025.3169.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

Whether the use of inhaled or intravenous sedation affects outcomes differentially in mechanically ventilated adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacy and safety of inhaled sevoflurane compared with intravenous propofol for sedation in patients with ARDS.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Phase 3 randomized, open-label, assessor-blinded clinical trial conducted from May 2020 to October 2023 with 90-day follow-up. Adults with early moderate to severe ARDS (defined by a ratio of Pao2 to the fraction of inspired oxygen of <150 mm Hg with a positive end-expiratory pressure of ≥8 cm H2O) were enrolled in 37 French intensive care units.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized to a strategy of inhaled sedation with sevoflurane (intervention group) or to a strategy of intravenous sedation with propofol (control group) for up to 7 days.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary end point was the number of ventilator-free days at 28 days; the key secondary end point was 90-day survival.

RESULTS

Of 687 patients enrolled (mean [SD] age, 65 [12] years; 30% female), 346 were randomized to sevoflurane and 341 to propofol. The median total duration of sedation was 7 days (IQR, 4 to 7) in both groups. The number of ventilator-free days through day 28 was 0.0 days (IQR, 0.0 to 11.9) in the sevoflurane group and 0.0 days (IQR, 0.0 to 18.7) in the propofol group (median difference, -2.1 [95% CI, -3.6 to -0.7]; standardized hazard ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.50 to 0.97]). The 90-day survival rates were 47.1% and 55.7% in the sevoflurane and propofol groups, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.05 to 1.62]). Among 4 secondary outcomes, sevoflurane was associated with higher 7-day mortality (19.4% vs 13.5%, respectively; relative risk, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.02 to 2.03]) and fewer intensive care unit-free days through day 28 (median, 0.0 [IQR, 0.0 to 6.0] vs 0.0 [IQR, 0.0 to 15.0]; median difference, -2.5 [95% CI, -3.7 to -1.4]) compared with propofol.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among patients with moderate to severe ARDS, inhaled sedation with sevoflurane resulted in fewer ventilator-free days at day 28 and lower 90-day survival than sedation with propofol.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04235608.

摘要

重要性

对于机械通气的急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)成年患者,吸入镇静或静脉镇静对预后的影响是否存在差异尚不清楚。

目的

确定与静脉注射丙泊酚相比,吸入七氟醚用于ARDS患者镇静的有效性和安全性。

设计、地点和参与者:2020年5月至2023年10月进行的3期随机、开放标签、评估者盲法临床试验,随访90天。37个法国重症监护病房纳入了早期中度至重度ARDS成年患者(定义为动脉血氧分压与吸入氧分数之比<150 mmHg且呼气末正压≥8 cm H2O)。

干预措施

患者被随机分配至七氟醚吸入镇静策略(干预组)或丙泊酚静脉镇静策略(对照组),持续7天。

主要结局和测量指标

主要终点是28天时无呼吸机天数;关键次要终点是90天生存率。

结果

687名纳入患者(平均[标准差]年龄,65[12]岁;30%为女性)中,346名被随机分配至七氟醚组,341名被随机分配至丙泊酚组。两组镇静总时长中位数均为7天(四分位间距,4至7)。七氟醚组至28天时的无呼吸机天数为0.0天(四分位间距,0.0至11.9),丙泊酚组为0.0天(四分位间距,0.0至18.7)(中位数差异,-2.1[95%置信区间,-3.6至-0.7];标准化风险比,0.76[95%置信区间,0.50至0.97])。七氟醚组和丙泊酚组的90天生存率分别为47.1%和55.7%(风险比,1.31[95%置信区间,1.05至1.62])。在4项次要结局中,与丙泊酚相比,七氟醚与更高的7天死亡率(分别为19.4%和13.5%;相对风险,1.44[95%置信区间,1.02至2.03])以及至28天时更少的无重症监护病房天数(中位数,0.0[四分位间距,0.0至6.0]对0.0[四分位间距,0.0至15.0];中位数差异,-2.5[95%置信区间,-3.7至-1.4])相关。

结论和相关性

在中度至重度ARDS患者中,与丙泊酚镇静相比,七氟醚吸入镇静导致28天时无呼吸机天数更少,90天生存率更低。

试验注册

ClinicalTrials.gov标识符:NCT04235608。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

3
Volatile anesthetics in the intensive care unit.重症监护病房中的挥发性麻醉剂。
Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther. 2025 Jul 10;57(1):165-169. doi: 10.5114/ait/207183.
4
Volatile agents: when generalization doesn't help.挥发性麻醉药:当常规方法无效时
Crit Care. 2025 Jul 14;29(1):305. doi: 10.1186/s13054-025-05554-w.

本文引用的文献

1
Sedation in the ICU.重症监护病房中的镇静。
NEJM Evid. 2024 Nov;3(11):EVIDra2300347. doi: 10.1056/EVIDra2300347. Epub 2024 Oct 22.
2
Volatile Anesthetic Sedation for Critically Ill Patients.用于重症患者的挥发性麻醉镇静
Anesthesiology. 2024 Jul 1;141(1):163-174. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000004994.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验