Best clinical model predicting extubation failure: a diagnostic accuracy post hoc analysis

IF 27.1 1区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Patricia Rodríguez Villamizar, Arnaud W. Thille, Margarita Márquez Doblas, Jean-Pierre Frat, Pilar Leal Sanz, Elena Alonso, Victoria País, Guillermo Morales, Laura Colinas, Alicia Propín, Aida Fernández Olivares, María Martínez Balaguer, Diego Alvaredo Rodrigo, Gonzalo Hernández
{"title":"Best clinical model predicting extubation failure: a diagnostic accuracy post hoc analysis","authors":"Patricia Rodríguez Villamizar, Arnaud W. Thille, Margarita Márquez Doblas, Jean-Pierre Frat, Pilar Leal Sanz, Elena Alonso, Victoria País, Guillermo Morales, Laura Colinas, Alicia Propín, Aida Fernández Olivares, María Martínez Balaguer, Diego Alvaredo Rodrigo, Gonzalo Hernández","doi":"10.1007/s00134-024-07758-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Purpose</h3><p>Predicting extubation failure remains a clinical challenge. This study aimed to determine diagnostic accuracy of models used at the bed side.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>Post hoc analysis of 2341 patients at all risk included in five multicenter randomized trials. Diagnostic accuracy of three clinical prediction models was compared: 3-factors model including age &gt; 65y, chronic heart or pulmonary disease; 4-factors model adding prolonged mechanical ventilation; and 11-factors model including age &gt; 65 years, ≥ 2 comorbidities, prolonged mechanical ventilation, acute heart failure as the primary indication for mechanical ventilation, moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, APACHE II score &gt; 12 on extubation day, airway patency problems, inability to deal with respiratory secretions, not simple weaning, obesity, or hypercapnia at the end of the spontaneous breathing trial. Crude and adjusted for spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) models were compared for all-cause reintubation at 7 days using Youden and Kappa indexes.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>The 3-factors model had a very low global prediction capability (Youden index 0.08 and Kappa index 0.04); the 4-factors and 11-factors models had low global prediction capability (Youden index 0.12 and 0.16, and Kappa index 0.06 and 0.07, respectively). Aggressive SBT strategies (pressure support ≥ 7 cm H<sub>2</sub>O with or without positive end-expiratory pressure) were associated with extubation failure risk (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). All adjusted models had low diagnostic capability (0.08/0.03, 0.07/0.03, and 0.06/0.02 respectively).</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusion</h3><p>Based on these results, the 3-factors model reported a very low diagnostic accuracy, and the 4 or 11-factors models showed similar low accuracy. No improvement was observed after adjusting for other aspects of weaning.</p>","PeriodicalId":13665,"journal":{"name":"Intensive Care Medicine","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":27.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intensive Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-024-07758-0","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Predicting extubation failure remains a clinical challenge. This study aimed to determine diagnostic accuracy of models used at the bed side.

Methods

Post hoc analysis of 2341 patients at all risk included in five multicenter randomized trials. Diagnostic accuracy of three clinical prediction models was compared: 3-factors model including age > 65y, chronic heart or pulmonary disease; 4-factors model adding prolonged mechanical ventilation; and 11-factors model including age > 65 years, ≥ 2 comorbidities, prolonged mechanical ventilation, acute heart failure as the primary indication for mechanical ventilation, moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, APACHE II score > 12 on extubation day, airway patency problems, inability to deal with respiratory secretions, not simple weaning, obesity, or hypercapnia at the end of the spontaneous breathing trial. Crude and adjusted for spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) models were compared for all-cause reintubation at 7 days using Youden and Kappa indexes.

Results

The 3-factors model had a very low global prediction capability (Youden index 0.08 and Kappa index 0.04); the 4-factors and 11-factors models had low global prediction capability (Youden index 0.12 and 0.16, and Kappa index 0.06 and 0.07, respectively). Aggressive SBT strategies (pressure support ≥ 7 cm H2O with or without positive end-expiratory pressure) were associated with extubation failure risk (p < 0.001). All adjusted models had low diagnostic capability (0.08/0.03, 0.07/0.03, and 0.06/0.02 respectively).

Conclusion

Based on these results, the 3-factors model reported a very low diagnostic accuracy, and the 4 or 11-factors models showed similar low accuracy. No improvement was observed after adjusting for other aspects of weaning.

预测拔管失败的最佳临床模型:诊断准确性事后分析
目的预测拔管失败仍然是一个临床挑战。本研究旨在确定在床侧使用的模型的诊断准确性。方法对5项多中心随机试验的2341例全危患者进行事后分析。比较3种临床预测模型的诊断准确率:年龄>; 65岁、慢性心肺疾病3因素模型;延长机械通气时间的4因素模型;11因素模型包括年龄65岁、合并症≥2、机械通气时间延长、以急性心力衰竭为机械通气主要指征、中重度慢性阻塞性肺疾病、拔管日APACHE II评分12、气道通畅问题、无法处理呼吸道分泌物、非简单脱机、肥胖或自主呼吸试验结束时高碳酸血症。采用Youden指数和Kappa指数比较7天全因再插管的原始和调整的自主呼吸试验(SBT)模型。结果3因子模型整体预测能力较低(约登指数为0.08,Kappa指数为0.04);4因子模型和11因子模型的整体预测能力较低(Youden指数分别为0.12和0.16,Kappa指数分别为0.06和0.07)。积极的SBT策略(压力支持≥7 cm H2O,伴或不伴呼气末正压)与拔管失败风险相关(p < 0.001)。所有调整后的模型诊断能力均较低(分别为0.08/0.03、0.07/0.03和0.06/0.02)。结论基于以上结果,3因素模型的诊断准确率很低,4因素或11因素模型的诊断准确率也很低。在调整了断奶的其他方面后,没有观察到改善。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Intensive Care Medicine
Intensive Care Medicine 医学-危重病医学
CiteScore
51.50
自引率
2.80%
发文量
326
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Intensive Care Medicine is the premier publication platform fostering the communication and exchange of cutting-edge research and ideas within the field of intensive care medicine on a comprehensive scale. Catering to professionals involved in intensive medical care, including intensivists, medical specialists, nurses, and other healthcare professionals, ICM stands as the official journal of The European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. ICM is dedicated to advancing the understanding and practice of intensive care medicine among professionals in Europe and beyond. The journal provides a robust platform for disseminating current research findings and innovative ideas in intensive care medicine. Content published in Intensive Care Medicine encompasses a wide range, including review articles, original research papers, letters, reviews, debates, and more.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信