Suppr超能文献

压力控制反比通气与体外二氧化碳清除治疗成人呼吸窘迫综合征的随机临床试验

Randomized clinical trial of pressure-controlled inverse ratio ventilation and extracorporeal CO2 removal for adult respiratory distress syndrome.

作者信息

Morris A H, Wallace C J, Menlove R L, Clemmer T P, Orme J F, Weaver L K, Dean N C, Thomas F, East T D, Pace N L, Suchyta M R, Beck E, Bombino M, Sittig D F, Böhm S, Hoffmann B, Becks H, Butler S, Pearl J, Rasmusson B

机构信息

Department of Medicine, LDS Hospital, Salt Lake City, Utah 84143.

出版信息

Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1994 Feb;149(2 Pt 1):295-305. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.149.2.8306022.

Abstract

The impact of a new therapy that includes pressure-controlled inverse ratio ventilation followed by extracorporeal CO2 removal on the survival of patients with severe ARDS was evaluated in a randomized controlled clinical trial. Computerized protocols generated around-the-clock instructions for management of arterial oxygenation to assure equivalent intensity of care for patients randomized to the new therapy limb and those randomized to the control, mechanical ventilation limb. We randomized 40 patients with severe ARDS who met the ECMO entry criteria. The main outcome measure was survival at 30 days after randomization. Survival was not significantly different in the 19 mechanical ventilation (42%) and 21 new therapy (extracorporeal) (33%) patients (p = 0.8). All deaths occurred within 30 days of randomization. Overall patient survival was 38% (15 of 40) and was about four times that expected from historical data (p = 0.0002). Extracorporeal treatment group survival was not significantly different from other published survival rates after extracorporeal CO2 removal. Mechanical ventilation patient group survival was significantly higher than the 12% derived from published data (p = 0.0001). Protocols controlled care 86% of the time. Average PaO2 was 59 mm Hg in both treatment groups. Intensity of care required to maintain arterial oxygenation was similar in both groups (2.6 and 2.6 PEEP changes/day; 4.3 and 5.0 FIO2 changes/day). We conclude that there was no significant difference in survival between the mechanical ventilation and the extracorporeal CO2 removal groups. We do not recommend extracorporeal support as a therapy for ARDS. Extracorporeal support for ARDS should be restricted to controlled clinical trials.

摘要

在一项随机对照临床试验中,评估了一种新疗法(包括压力控制反比通气,随后进行体外二氧化碳清除)对重症急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)患者生存率的影响。计算机化方案生成了全天候的动脉氧合管理指导,以确保随机分配到新疗法组和对照组(机械通气组)的患者得到同等强度的治疗。我们将40例符合体外膜肺氧合(ECMO)纳入标准的重症ARDS患者进行了随机分组。主要结局指标是随机分组后30天的生存率。19例机械通气患者(42%)和21例新疗法(体外)患者(33%)的生存率无显著差异(p = 0.8)。所有死亡均发生在随机分组后的30天内。总体患者生存率为38%(40例中的15例),约为历史数据预期生存率的四倍(p = 0.0002)。体外治疗组的生存率与其他已发表的体外二氧化碳清除后的生存率无显著差异。机械通气患者组的生存率显著高于已发表数据得出的12%(p = 0.0001)。方案在86%的时间内控制了治疗。两个治疗组的平均动脉血氧分压(PaO2)均为59毫米汞柱。两组维持动脉氧合所需的治疗强度相似(每天呼气末正压通气(PEEP)变化2.6次和2.6次;每天吸入氧浓度(FIO2)变化4.3次和5.0次)。我们得出结论,机械通气组和体外二氧化碳清除组的生存率无显著差异。我们不推荐将体外支持作为ARDS的一种治疗方法。ARDS的体外支持应仅限于对照临床试验。

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