机械通气在预防重症监护获得性虚弱患者拔管后急性呼吸衰竭中的作用:一项随机对照试验。

Philippe Wibart, Thomas Réginault, Margarita Garcia-Fontan, Bérangère Barbrel, Clement Bader, Antoine Benard, Verônica Franco Parreira, Daniel Gonzalez-Antón, Nam H Bui, Didier Gruson, Gilles Hilbert, Roberto Martinez-Alejos, Frédéric Vargas
{"title":"机械通气在预防重症监护获得性虚弱患者拔管后急性呼吸衰竭中的作用:一项随机对照试验。","authors":"Philippe Wibart,&nbsp;Thomas Réginault,&nbsp;Margarita Garcia-Fontan,&nbsp;Bérangère Barbrel,&nbsp;Clement Bader,&nbsp;Antoine Benard,&nbsp;Verônica Franco Parreira,&nbsp;Daniel Gonzalez-Antón,&nbsp;Nam H Bui,&nbsp;Didier Gruson,&nbsp;Gilles Hilbert,&nbsp;Roberto Martinez-Alejos,&nbsp;Frédéric Vargas","doi":"10.5935/2965-2774.20230410-en","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We hypothesized that the use of mechanical insufflation-exsufflation can reduce the incidence of acute respiratory failure within the 48-hour post-extubation period in intensive care unit-acquired weakness patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a prospective randomized controlled open-label trial. Patients diagnosed with intensive care unit-acquired weakness were consecutively enrolled based on a Medical Research Council score ≤ 48/60. The patients randomly received two daily sessions; in the control group, conventional chest physiotherapy was performed, while in the intervention group, chest physiotherapy was associated with mechanical insufflation-exsufflation. The incidence of acute respiratory failure within 48 hours of extubation was evaluated. Similarly, the reintubation rate, intensive care unit length of stay, mortality at 28 days, and survival probability at 90 days were assessed. The study was stopped after futility results in the interim analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 122 consecutive patients (n = 61 per group). There was no significant difference in the incidence of acute respiratory failure between treatments (11.5% control group versus 16.4%, intervention group; p = 0.60), the need for reintubation (3.6% versus 10.7%; p = 0.27), mean length of stay (3 versus 4 days; p = 0.33), mortality at Day 28 (9.8% versus 15.0%; p = 0.42), or survival probability at Day 90 (21.3% versus 28.3%; p = 0.41).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Mechanical insufflation-exsufflation combined with chest physiotherapy seems to have no impact in preventing postextubation acute respiratory failure in intensive care unit-acquired weakness patients. Similarly, mortality and survival probability were similar in both groups. Nevertheless, given the early termination of the trial, further clinical investigation is strongly recommended.</p><p><strong>Clinical trials register: </strong>NCT01931228.</p>","PeriodicalId":72721,"journal":{"name":"Critical care science","volume":"35 2","pages":"168-176"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10406413/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of mechanical in-exsufflation in preventing postextubation acute respiratory failure in intensive care acquired weakness patients: a randomized controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Philippe Wibart,&nbsp;Thomas Réginault,&nbsp;Margarita Garcia-Fontan,&nbsp;Bérangère Barbrel,&nbsp;Clement Bader,&nbsp;Antoine Benard,&nbsp;Verônica Franco Parreira,&nbsp;Daniel Gonzalez-Antón,&nbsp;Nam H Bui,&nbsp;Didier Gruson,&nbsp;Gilles Hilbert,&nbsp;Roberto Martinez-Alejos,&nbsp;Frédéric Vargas\",\"doi\":\"10.5935/2965-2774.20230410-en\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We hypothesized that the use of mechanical insufflation-exsufflation can reduce the incidence of acute respiratory failure within the 48-hour post-extubation period in intensive care unit-acquired weakness patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a prospective randomized controlled open-label trial. Patients diagnosed with intensive care unit-acquired weakness were consecutively enrolled based on a Medical Research Council score ≤ 48/60. The patients randomly received two daily sessions; in the control group, conventional chest physiotherapy was performed, while in the intervention group, chest physiotherapy was associated with mechanical insufflation-exsufflation. The incidence of acute respiratory failure within 48 hours of extubation was evaluated. Similarly, the reintubation rate, intensive care unit length of stay, mortality at 28 days, and survival probability at 90 days were assessed. The study was stopped after futility results in the interim analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 122 consecutive patients (n = 61 per group). There was no significant difference in the incidence of acute respiratory failure between treatments (11.5% control group versus 16.4%, intervention group; p = 0.60), the need for reintubation (3.6% versus 10.7%; p = 0.27), mean length of stay (3 versus 4 days; p = 0.33), mortality at Day 28 (9.8% versus 15.0%; p = 0.42), or survival probability at Day 90 (21.3% versus 28.3%; p = 0.41).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Mechanical insufflation-exsufflation combined with chest physiotherapy seems to have no impact in preventing postextubation acute respiratory failure in intensive care unit-acquired weakness patients. Similarly, mortality and survival probability were similar in both groups. Nevertheless, given the early termination of the trial, further clinical investigation is strongly recommended.</p><p><strong>Clinical trials register: </strong>NCT01931228.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72721,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical care science\",\"volume\":\"35 2\",\"pages\":\"168-176\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10406413/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical care science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5935/2965-2774.20230410-en\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical care science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5935/2965-2774.20230410-en","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:我们假设在重症监护室获得性虚弱患者中,使用机械吹入排气可以降低拔管后48小时内急性呼吸衰竭的发生率。方法:这是一项前瞻性随机对照开放标签试验。根据医学研究委员会评分≤48/60,连续入选被诊断为重症监护室获得性虚弱的患者。患者每天随机接受两次治疗;对照组采用常规胸部物理治疗,干预组采用机械吹入-呼气相结合的胸部物理治疗。评估拔管后48小时内急性呼吸衰竭的发生率。同样,对再次插管率、重症监护室住院时间、28天时的死亡率和90天时的生存概率进行了评估。在中期分析结果无效后,该研究停止。结果:我们纳入了122名连续的患者(每组n=61)。治疗之间的急性呼吸衰竭发生率(对照组11.5%与干预组16.4%;p=0.60)、需要再次插管(3.6%与10.7%;p=0.27)、平均住院时间(3与4天;p=0.33)、第28天死亡率(9.8%与15.0%;p=0.42)无显著差异,或第90天的生存概率(21.3%对28.3%;p=0.41)。结论:机械吹入-排气联合胸部物理治疗对重症监护室获得性虚弱患者拔管后急性呼吸衰竭的预防似乎没有影响。同样,两组的死亡率和生存概率相似。然而,鉴于试验提前终止,强烈建议进行进一步的临床研究。临床试验注册号:NCT01931228。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Effects of mechanical in-exsufflation in preventing postextubation acute respiratory failure in intensive care acquired weakness patients: a randomized controlled trial.

Effects of mechanical in-exsufflation in preventing postextubation acute respiratory failure in intensive care acquired weakness patients: a randomized controlled trial.

Effects of mechanical in-exsufflation in preventing postextubation acute respiratory failure in intensive care acquired weakness patients: a randomized controlled trial.

Effects of mechanical in-exsufflation in preventing postextubation acute respiratory failure in intensive care acquired weakness patients: a randomized controlled trial.

Objective: We hypothesized that the use of mechanical insufflation-exsufflation can reduce the incidence of acute respiratory failure within the 48-hour post-extubation period in intensive care unit-acquired weakness patients.

Methods: This was a prospective randomized controlled open-label trial. Patients diagnosed with intensive care unit-acquired weakness were consecutively enrolled based on a Medical Research Council score ≤ 48/60. The patients randomly received two daily sessions; in the control group, conventional chest physiotherapy was performed, while in the intervention group, chest physiotherapy was associated with mechanical insufflation-exsufflation. The incidence of acute respiratory failure within 48 hours of extubation was evaluated. Similarly, the reintubation rate, intensive care unit length of stay, mortality at 28 days, and survival probability at 90 days were assessed. The study was stopped after futility results in the interim analysis.

Results: We included 122 consecutive patients (n = 61 per group). There was no significant difference in the incidence of acute respiratory failure between treatments (11.5% control group versus 16.4%, intervention group; p = 0.60), the need for reintubation (3.6% versus 10.7%; p = 0.27), mean length of stay (3 versus 4 days; p = 0.33), mortality at Day 28 (9.8% versus 15.0%; p = 0.42), or survival probability at Day 90 (21.3% versus 28.3%; p = 0.41).

Conclusion: Mechanical insufflation-exsufflation combined with chest physiotherapy seems to have no impact in preventing postextubation acute respiratory failure in intensive care unit-acquired weakness patients. Similarly, mortality and survival probability were similar in both groups. Nevertheless, given the early termination of the trial, further clinical investigation is strongly recommended.

Clinical trials register: NCT01931228.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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