• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

在一个多学科重症监护病房对600例机械通气患者进行选择性消化道去污的随机对照试验。

Randomized, controlled trial of selective digestive decontamination in 600 mechanically ventilated patients in a multidisciplinary intensive care unit.

作者信息

Verwaest C, Verhaegen J, Ferdinande P, Schetz M, Van den Berghe G, Verbist L, Lauwers P

机构信息

Department of Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Gasthuisberg, Leuven, Belgium.

出版信息

Crit Care Med. 1997 Jan;25(1):63-71. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199701000-00014.

DOI:10.1097/00003246-199701000-00014
PMID:8989178
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of two regimens of selective decontamination of the digestive tract in mechanically ventilated patients.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, concurrent trial.

SETTING

Multidisciplinary intensive care unit (ICU) in a 1,800-bed university hospital.

PATIENTS

Consecutive patients (n = 660) who were likely to require mechanical ventilation for at least 48 hrs were randomized to one of three groups: conventional antibiotic regimen (control group A); oral and enteral ofloxacin-amphotericin B (group B); and oral and enteral polymyxin E-tobramycin-amphotericin B (group C). Both treatment groups received systemic antibiotics for 4 days (ofloxacin in group B and cefotaxime in group C).

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized to receive standard treatment (control group A, n = 220), selective decontamination regimen B (group B, n = 220), and selective decontamination regimen C (group C, n = 220). After early deaths and exclusions from the study, 185 controls (group A) and 193 (group B)/200 (group C) selective decontamination regimen patients were available for analysis.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Measurements included colonization and primary/secondary infection rate, ICU mortality rate, emergence of antibiotic resistance, length of ICU stay, and antimicrobial agent costs. The study duration was 19 months. The patient groups were fully comparable for age, diagnostic category, and severity of illness. One third of patients in each group suffered a nosocomial infection at the time of admission. There was a significant difference between treatment group B and control group A in the number of infected patients (odds ratio of 0.42, 95% confidence interval of 0.27 to 0.64), secondary lower respiratory tract infection (odds ratio of 0.47, 95% confidence interval of 0.26 to 0.82), and urinary tract infection (odds ratio of 0.47, 95% confidence interval of 0.27 to 0.81). Significantly more Gram-positive bacteremias occurred in treatment group C vs. group A (odds ratio of 1.22, 95% confidence interval 0.72 to 2.08). Infection at the time of admission proved to be the most significant risk factor for subsequent infection in control and both treatment groups. ICU mortality rate was almost identical (group A 16.8%, group B 17.6%, and group C 15.5%) and was not significantly related to primary or secondary infection. Increased antimicrobial resistance was recorded in both treatment groups: tobramycin-resistant enterobacteriaceae (group C 48% vs. group A 14%, p < .01), ofloxacin-resistant enterobacteriaceae (group B 50% vs. group A 11%, p < .02), ofloxacin-resistant nonfermenters (group B 81% vs. group A 52%, p < .02), and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (group C 83% vs. group A 55%, p < .05). Antimicrobial agent costs were comparable in control and group C patients; one third less was spent for group B patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In cases of high colonization and infection rates at the time of ICU admission, the preventive benefit of selective decontamination is highly debatable. Emergence of multiple antibiotic-resistant microorganisms creates a clinical problem and a definite change in the ecology of environmental, colonizing, and infecting bacteria. The selection of multiple antibiotic-resistant Gram-positive cocci is particularly hazardous. No beneficial effect on survival is observed. Moreover, selective decontamination adds substantially to the cost of ICU care.

摘要

目的

评估两种消化道选择性去污方案对机械通气患者的疗效。

设计

前瞻性、随机、同期试验。

地点

一所拥有1800张床位的大学医院的多学科重症监护病房(ICU)。

患者

连续入选的可能需要机械通气至少48小时的患者(n = 660)被随机分为三组之一:传统抗生素方案(A对照组);口服及肠内给予氧氟沙星-两性霉素B(B组);口服及肠内给予多粘菌素E-妥布霉素-两性霉素B(C组)。两个治疗组均接受全身性抗生素治疗4天(B组用氧氟沙星,C组用头孢噻肟)。

干预措施

患者被随机分配接受标准治疗(A对照组,n = 220)、选择性去污方案B(B组,n = 220)和选择性去污方案C(C组,n = 220)。在早期死亡和排除出研究后,185例对照组(A组)患者以及193例(B组)/200例(C组)接受选择性去污方案的患者可供分析。

测量指标及主要结果

测量指标包括定植及原发性/继发性感染率、ICU死亡率、抗生素耐药性的出现、ICU住院时间以及抗菌药物费用。研究持续时间为19个月。各患者组在年龄、诊断类别及疾病严重程度方面具有完全可比性。每组中有三分之一的患者在入院时发生医院感染。治疗组B与对照组A在感染患者数量(比值比为0.42,95%置信区间为0.27至0.64)、继发性下呼吸道感染(比值比为0.47,95%置信区间为0.26至0.82)及尿路感染(比值比为0.47,95%置信区间为0.27至0.81)方面存在显著差异。治疗组C与A组相比,革兰阳性菌血症的发生率显著更高(比值比为1.22,95%置信区间为0.72至2.08)。入院时的感染被证明是对照组和两个治疗组后续感染的最显著危险因素。ICU死亡率几乎相同(A组16.8%,B组17.6%,C组15.5%),且与原发性或继发性感染无显著相关性。两个治疗组均出现抗菌药物耐药性增加:对妥布霉素耐药的肠杆菌科细菌(C组48% vs A组14%,p <.01)、对氧氟沙星耐药的肠杆菌科细菌(B组50% vs A组11%,p <.02)、对氧氟沙星耐药的非发酵菌(B组81% vs A组52%,p <.02)以及耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(C组83% vs A组55%,p <.05)。对照组和C组患者的抗菌药物费用相当;B组患者的花费减少了三分之一。

结论

在ICU入院时定植和感染率较高的情况下,选择性去污的预防益处极具争议。多种抗生素耐药微生物的出现造成了临床问题,并且环境、定植及感染细菌的生态发生了明确变化。多重耐药革兰阳性球菌的选择尤其危险。未观察到对生存的有益影响。此外,选择性去污大幅增加了ICU护理的费用。

相似文献

1
Randomized, controlled trial of selective digestive decontamination in 600 mechanically ventilated patients in a multidisciplinary intensive care unit.在一个多学科重症监护病房对600例机械通气患者进行选择性消化道去污的随机对照试验。
Crit Care Med. 1997 Jan;25(1):63-71. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199701000-00014.
2
Effects of selective decontamination of digestive tract on mortality and acquisition of resistant bacteria in intensive care: a randomised controlled trial.消化道选择性去污染对重症监护病房死亡率及耐药菌获得情况的影响:一项随机对照试验
Lancet. 2003 Sep 27;362(9389):1011-6. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14409-1.
3
Long-term effects of selective decontamination on antimicrobial resistance.选择性去污对抗菌药物耐药性的长期影响。
Crit Care Med. 1995 Apr;23(4):637-45. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199504000-00010.
4
Effect of selective decontamination on antimicrobial resistance in intensive care units: a systematic review and meta-analysis.选择性去污染对重症监护病房抗菌耐药性的影响:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Lancet Infect Dis. 2013 Apr;13(4):328-41. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(12)70322-5. Epub 2013 Jan 25.
5
Utility of selective digestive decontamination in mechanically ventilated patients.选择性消化道去污在机械通气患者中的应用价值。
Ann Intern Med. 1994 Mar 1;120(5):389-95. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-120-5-199403010-00006.
6
Selective decontamination of the digestive tract in multiple trauma patients--is there a role? Results of a prospective, double-blind, randomized trial.多发伤患者消化道选择性去污——有作用吗?一项前瞻性、双盲、随机试验的结果
Crit Care Med. 1994 Jan;22(1):33-9. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199401000-00010.
7
Selective oropharyngeal decontamination versus selective digestive decontamination in critically ill patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.危重症患者中选择性口咽去污与选择性消化道去污的比较:一项随机对照试验的荟萃分析
Drug Des Devel Ther. 2015 Jul 14;9:3617-24. doi: 10.2147/DDDT.S84587. eCollection 2015.
8
Prevention of nosocomial infection in critically ill patients by selective decontamination of the digestive tract. A randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled study.通过消化道选择性去污预防重症患者的医院感染。一项随机、双盲、安慰剂对照研究。
Intensive Care Med. 1992;18(7):398-404. doi: 10.1007/BF01694341.
9
All great truths are iconoclastic: selective decontamination of the digestive tract moves from heresy to level 1 truth.所有伟大的真理都是破除旧习的:消化道选择性去污从异端邪说变成了一级真理。
Intensive Care Med. 2003 May;29(5):677-90. doi: 10.1007/s00134-003-1722-2. Epub 2003 Apr 10.
10
Decreased mortality rate and length of hospital stay in surgical intensive care unit patients with successful selective decontamination of the gut.成功进行肠道选择性去污的外科重症监护病房患者的死亡率降低,住院时间缩短。
Crit Care Med. 1993 Nov;21(11):1692-8. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199311000-00018.

引用本文的文献

1
Rebound Inverts the Bacteremia Prevention Effect of Antibiotic Based Decontamination Interventions in ICU Cohorts with Prolonged Length of Stay.在住院时间延长的重症监护病房队列中,反弹逆转了基于抗生素去污干预措施预防菌血症的效果。
Antibiotics (Basel). 2024 Mar 29;13(4):316. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics13040316.
2
Inhaled amikacin versus placebo to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia: the AMIKINHAL double-blind multicentre randomised controlled trial protocol.吸入阿米卡星预防呼吸机相关性肺炎与安慰剂对照的双盲多中心随机对照试验方案。
BMJ Open. 2021 Sep 14;11(9):e048591. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-048591.
3
Topical antibiotic prophylaxis to reduce respiratory tract infections and mortality in adults receiving mechanical ventilation.
局部用抗生素预防成人机械通气患者的呼吸道感染和死亡。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Jan 22;1(1):CD000022. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000022.pub4.
4
Selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) in critically ill patients: a narrative review.选择性消化道去污染(SDD)在危重症患者中的应用:一项叙述性综述。
Intensive Care Med. 2020 Feb;46(2):343-349. doi: 10.1007/s00134-019-05883-9. Epub 2019 Dec 9.
5
Unusually High Incidences of Bacteremias Within Topical Polymyxin-Based Decolonization Studies of Mechanically Ventilated Patients: Benchmarking the Literature.基于多粘菌素的机械通气患者局部去定植研究中菌血症的异常高发病率:文献基准分析
Open Forum Infect Dis. 2018 Oct 10;5(11):ofy256. doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofy256. eCollection 2018 Nov.
6
Unusually High Incidences of Staphylococcus aureus Infection within Studies of Ventilator Associated Pneumonia Prevention Using Topical Antibiotics: Benchmarking the Evidence Base.在使用局部抗生素预防呼吸机相关性肺炎的研究中,金黄色葡萄球菌感染的异常高发病率:对证据基础进行基准评估。
Microorganisms. 2018 Jan 4;6(1):2. doi: 10.3390/microorganisms6010002.
7
Selective intestinal decontamination for the prevention of early bacterial infections after liver transplantation.选择性肠道去污预防肝移植术后早期细菌感染
World J Gastroenterol. 2016 Jul 14;22(26):5950-7. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i26.5950.
8
Impact of selective digestive decontamination on respiratory tract Candida among patients with suspected ventilator-associated pneumonia. A meta-analysis.选择性消化道去污对疑似呼吸机相关性肺炎患者呼吸道念珠菌的影响。一项荟萃分析。
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2016 Jul;35(7):1121-35. doi: 10.1007/s10096-016-2643-7. Epub 2016 Apr 26.
9
Topical antibiotics as a major contextual hazard toward bacteremia within selective digestive decontamination studies: a meta-analysis.在选择性消化道去污研究中,局部使用抗生素是导致菌血症的主要背景危险因素:一项荟萃分析。
BMC Infect Dis. 2014 Dec 31;14:714. doi: 10.1186/s12879-014-0714-x.
10
Reply to "selective digestive tract decontamination and spread of colistin resistance: antibiotic prophylaxis is not a substitute for hygiene".对《选择性消化道去污染与黏菌素耐药性传播:抗生素预防不能替代卫生措施》的回复
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014 Jun;58(6):3576-8. doi: 10.1128/AAC.02814-13.