Conservative Oxygen Therapy in Mechanically Ventilated Critically Ill Adult Patients: The UK-ROX Randomized Clinical Trial.

Q1 Medicine
Daniel S Martin, Doug W Gould, Tasnin Shahid, James C Doidge, Alex Cowden, Zia Sadique, Julie Camsooksai, Walton N Charles, Miriam Davey, Amelia Francis-Johnson, Roger M Garrett, Michael P W Grocott, Joanne Jones, Lamprini Lampro, Diane M Mackle, B Ronan O'Driscoll, Alvin Richards-Belle, Anthony J Rostron, Tamás Szakmány, Alex Warren, Paul J Young, Kathryn M Rowan, David A Harrison, Paul R Mouncey
{"title":"Conservative Oxygen Therapy in Mechanically Ventilated Critically Ill Adult Patients: The UK-ROX Randomized Clinical Trial.","authors":"Daniel S Martin, Doug W Gould, Tasnin Shahid, James C Doidge, Alex Cowden, Zia Sadique, Julie Camsooksai, Walton N Charles, Miriam Davey, Amelia Francis-Johnson, Roger M Garrett, Michael P W Grocott, Joanne Jones, Lamprini Lampro, Diane M Mackle, B Ronan O'Driscoll, Alvin Richards-Belle, Anthony J Rostron, Tamás Szakmány, Alex Warren, Paul J Young, Kathryn M Rowan, David A Harrison, Paul R Mouncey","doi":"10.1001/jama.2025.9663","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Supplemental oxygen is frequently given to patients in intensive care units (ICUs); however, there is insufficient evidence to guide its therapeutic use and to minimize the potential harm caused by administering too little or too much.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine whether reducing exposure to supplemental oxygen through a strategy of conservative oxygen therapy by using a peripheral oxygen saturation (Spo2) target of 90% (range, 88%-92%) reduces mortality at 90 days in mechanically ventilated adult patients receiving supplemental oxygen in the ICU.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>Multicenter, pragmatic, randomized clinical trial conducted in 97 ICUs in the UK including 16 500 mechanically ventilated patients receiving supplemental oxygen. Participants were enrolled between May 2021 and November 2024. Follow-up was completed in February 2025.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Participants randomized to conservative oxygen therapy (n = 8258) received the lowest fraction of inspired oxygen possible to maintain their Spo2 at 90%. Participants randomized to usual oxygen therapy (n = 8242) received oxygen therapy at the discretion of the treating clinician.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included duration of ICU and acute hospital stay among survivors, days alive and free from organ support at 30 days, and mortality at other time points.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 16 500 randomized patients, primary outcome data were available for 16 394 (8211 in the conservative and 8183 in the usual oxygen therapy group). Randomized groups were similar (median age, 60 [IQR, 48-71] years and 38.2% females in both groups [n = 5652]). Exposure to supplemental oxygen was 29% lower for participants in the conservative oxygen therapy group compared with the usual oxygen therapy group. By 90 days, 2908 participants (35.4%) in the conservative oxygen therapy group had died compared with 2858 (34.9%) in the usual oxygen therapy group. After adjustment for prespecified baseline variables, the risk difference was 0.7 percentage points (95% CI, -0.7 to 2.0; P = .28). There were no significant differences in durations in ICU or hospital stay, days alive and free from organ support at 30 days, or mortality at other time points.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In adult patients receiving mechanical ventilation and supplemental oxygen in the ICU, minimizing oxygen exposure through conservative oxygen therapy did not significantly reduce all-cause mortality at 90 days.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN13384956.</p>","PeriodicalId":17196,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Medical Association","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12163715/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Medical Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2025.9663","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: Supplemental oxygen is frequently given to patients in intensive care units (ICUs); however, there is insufficient evidence to guide its therapeutic use and to minimize the potential harm caused by administering too little or too much.

Objective: To determine whether reducing exposure to supplemental oxygen through a strategy of conservative oxygen therapy by using a peripheral oxygen saturation (Spo2) target of 90% (range, 88%-92%) reduces mortality at 90 days in mechanically ventilated adult patients receiving supplemental oxygen in the ICU.

Design, setting, and participants: Multicenter, pragmatic, randomized clinical trial conducted in 97 ICUs in the UK including 16 500 mechanically ventilated patients receiving supplemental oxygen. Participants were enrolled between May 2021 and November 2024. Follow-up was completed in February 2025.

Interventions: Participants randomized to conservative oxygen therapy (n = 8258) received the lowest fraction of inspired oxygen possible to maintain their Spo2 at 90%. Participants randomized to usual oxygen therapy (n = 8242) received oxygen therapy at the discretion of the treating clinician.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included duration of ICU and acute hospital stay among survivors, days alive and free from organ support at 30 days, and mortality at other time points.

Results: Of 16 500 randomized patients, primary outcome data were available for 16 394 (8211 in the conservative and 8183 in the usual oxygen therapy group). Randomized groups were similar (median age, 60 [IQR, 48-71] years and 38.2% females in both groups [n = 5652]). Exposure to supplemental oxygen was 29% lower for participants in the conservative oxygen therapy group compared with the usual oxygen therapy group. By 90 days, 2908 participants (35.4%) in the conservative oxygen therapy group had died compared with 2858 (34.9%) in the usual oxygen therapy group. After adjustment for prespecified baseline variables, the risk difference was 0.7 percentage points (95% CI, -0.7 to 2.0; P = .28). There were no significant differences in durations in ICU or hospital stay, days alive and free from organ support at 30 days, or mortality at other time points.

Conclusions and relevance: In adult patients receiving mechanical ventilation and supplemental oxygen in the ICU, minimizing oxygen exposure through conservative oxygen therapy did not significantly reduce all-cause mortality at 90 days.

Trial registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN13384956.

机械通气危重成人患者保守氧疗:UK-ROX随机临床试验。
重要性:重症监护病房(icu)的患者经常需要补充氧气;然而,没有足够的证据来指导其治疗用途,并尽量减少因施用过少或过多而造成的潜在危害。目的:确定采用外周氧饱和度(Spo2)目标为90%(范围88%-92%)的保守氧治疗策略是否能降低在ICU接受补充氧的机械通气成人患者90天的死亡率。设计、设置和参与者:在英国97个icu中进行的多中心、实用、随机临床试验,包括16 500名接受补充氧气的机械通气患者。参与者在2021年5月至2024年11月期间被招募。随访于2025年2月完成。干预措施:随机分配到保守氧治疗组的参与者(n = 8258)接受尽可能低的吸入氧,以维持其Spo2在90%。随机分配到常规氧治疗组的参与者(n = 8242)在治疗临床医生的决定下接受氧治疗。主要结局和指标:主要结局为90天全因死亡率。次要结局包括幸存者ICU和急性住院时间、30天存活和无器官支持天数以及其他时间点的死亡率。结果:在16 500例随机患者中,有16 394例(保守组8211例,常规氧疗组8183例)的主要结局数据可用。随机分组相似(中位年龄60 [IQR, 48-71]岁,两组38.2%为女性[n = 5652])。与常规氧疗组相比,保守氧疗组参与者的补充氧暴露降低了29%。90 d时,保守氧疗组死亡2908例(35.4%),常规氧疗组死亡2858例(34.9%)。在调整预先指定的基线变量后,风险差异为0.7个百分点(95% CI, -0.7至2.0;p = .28)。ICU或住院时间、30天存活和无器官支持天数以及其他时间点的死亡率均无显著差异。结论及相关性:在ICU接受机械通气和补充氧的成年患者中,通过保守氧治疗减少氧暴露并不能显著降低90天的全因死亡率。试验注册:isrctn.org标识符:ISRCTN13384956。
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
CiteScore
45.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: JAMA, published continuously since 1883, is an international peer-reviewed general medical journal. JAMA is a member of the JAMA Network, a consortium of peer-reviewed, general medical and specialty publications.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信