Suppr超能文献

四种机械通气患者撤机方法的比较。西班牙肺衰竭协作组。

A comparison of four methods of weaning patients from mechanical ventilation. Spanish Lung Failure Collaborative Group.

作者信息

Esteban A, Frutos F, Tobin M J, Alía I, Solsona J F, Valverdú I, Fernández R, de la Cal M A, Benito S, Tomás R

机构信息

Servicio de Cuidados Intensivos, Hospital Universitario de Getafe, Madrid, Spain.

出版信息

N Engl J Med. 1995 Feb 9;332(6):345-50. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199502093320601.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Weaning patients from mechanical ventilation is an important problem in intensive care units. Weaning is usually conducted in an empirical manner, and a standardized approach has not been developed.

METHODS

We carried out a prospective, randomized, multicenter study involving 546 patients who had received mechanical ventilation for a mean (+/- SD) of 7.5 +/- 6.1 days and who were considered by their physicians to be ready for weaning. One hundred thirty patients had respiratory distress during a two-hour trial of spontaneous breathing. These patients were randomly assigned to undergo one of four weaning techniques: intermittent mandatory ventilation, in which the ventilator rate was initially set at a mean (+/- SD) of 10.0 +/- 2.2 breaths per minute and then decreased, if possible, at least twice a day, usually by 2 to 4 breaths per minute (29 patients); pressure-support ventilation, in which pressure support was initially set at 18.0 +/- 6.1 cm of water and then reduced, if possible, by 2 to 4 cm of water at least twice a day (37 patients); intermittent trials of spontaneous breathing, conducted two or more times a day if possible (33 patients); or a once-daily trail of spontaneous breathing (31 patients). Standardized protocols were followed for each technique.

RESULTS

The median duration of weaning was 5 days for intermittent mandatory ventilation (first quartile, 3 days; third quartile, 11 days), 4 days for pressure-support ventilation (2 and 12 days, respectively), 3 days for intermittent (multiple) trials of spontaneous breathing (2 and 6 days, respectively), and 3 days for a once-daily trial of spontaneous breathing (1 and 6 days, respectively). After adjustment for other covariates, the rate of successful weaning was higher with a once-daily trial of spontaneous breathing than with intermittent mandatory ventilation (rate ratio, 2.83; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.36 to 5.89; P < 0.006) or pressure-support ventilation (rate ratio, 2.05; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.04 to 4.04; P < 0.04). There was no significant difference in the rate of success between once-daily trials and multiple trials of spontaneous breathing.

CONCLUSIONS

A once-daily trial of spontaneous breathing led to extubation about three times more quickly than intermittent mandatory ventilation and about twice as quickly as pressure-support ventilation. Multiple daily trials of spontaneous breathing were equally successful.

摘要

背景

在重症监护病房中,使患者脱离机械通气是一个重要问题。撤机通常以经验方式进行,尚未形成标准化方法。

方法

我们开展了一项前瞻性、随机、多中心研究,纳入546例接受机械通气平均(±标准差)7.5±6.1天且医生认为已准备好撤机的患者。130例患者在两小时自主呼吸试验期间出现呼吸窘迫。这些患者被随机分配接受四种撤机技术之一:间歇强制通气,其中呼吸机频率最初设定为平均(±标准差)每分钟10.0±2.2次呼吸,然后尽可能每天至少降低两次,通常每分钟降低2至4次呼吸(29例患者);压力支持通气,其中压力支持最初设定为18.0±6.1厘米水柱,然后尽可能每天至少降低2至4厘米水柱两次(37例患者);每天尽可能进行两次或更多次自主呼吸间歇试验(33例患者);或每天一次自主呼吸试验(31例患者)。每种技术均遵循标准化方案。

结果

间歇强制通气撤机的中位持续时间为5天(第一四分位数,3天;第三四分位数,11天),压力支持通气为4天(分别为2天和12天),自主呼吸间歇(多次)试验为3天(分别为2天和6天),每天一次自主呼吸试验为3天(分别为1天和6天)。在对其他协变量进行调整后,每天一次自主呼吸试验的成功撤机率高于间歇强制通气(率比,2.83;95%置信区间,1.36至5.89;P<0.006)或压力支持通气(率比,2.05;95%置信区间,1.04至4.04;P<0.04)。每天一次试验与多次自主呼吸试验之间的成功率无显著差异。

结论

每天一次自主呼吸试验导致拔管的速度比间歇强制通气快约三倍,比压力支持通气快约两倍。每天多次自主呼吸试验同样成功。

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