创伤患者的叹息通气:SiVent随机临床试验。

IF 63.1 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Richard K Albert, Gregory J Jurkovich, John Connett, Erika S Helgeson, Angela Keniston, Helen Voelker, Sarah Lindberg, Jennifer L Proper, Grant Bochicchio, Deborah M Stein, Christian Cain, Ron Tesoriero, Carlos V R Brown, James Davis, Lena Napolitano, Thomas Carver, Mark Cipolle, Luis Cardenas, Joseph Minei, Raminder Nirula, Jay Doucet, Preston R Miller, Jeffrey Johnson, Kenji Inaba, Lillian Kao
{"title":"创伤患者的叹息通气:SiVent随机临床试验。","authors":"Richard K Albert, Gregory J Jurkovich, John Connett, Erika S Helgeson, Angela Keniston, Helen Voelker, Sarah Lindberg, Jennifer L Proper, Grant Bochicchio, Deborah M Stein, Christian Cain, Ron Tesoriero, Carlos V R Brown, James Davis, Lena Napolitano, Thomas Carver, Mark Cipolle, Luis Cardenas, Joseph Minei, Raminder Nirula, Jay Doucet, Preston R Miller, Jeffrey Johnson, Kenji Inaba, Lillian Kao","doi":"10.1001/jama.2023.21739","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Among patients receiving mechanical ventilation, tidal volumes with each breath are often constant or similar. This may lead to ventilator-induced lung injury by altering or depleting surfactant. The role of sigh breaths in reducing ventilator-induced lung injury among trauma patients at risk of poor outcomes is unknown.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine whether adding sigh breaths improves clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>A pragmatic, randomized trial of sigh breaths plus usual care conducted from 2016 to 2022 with 28-day follow-up in 15 academic trauma centers in the US. Inclusion criteria were age older than 18 years, mechanical ventilation because of trauma for less than 24 hours, 1 or more of 5 risk factors for developing acute respiratory distress syndrome, expected duration of ventilation longer than 24 hours, and predicted survival longer than 48 hours.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Sigh volumes producing plateau pressures of 35 cm H2O (or 40 cm H2O for inpatients with body mass indexes >35) delivered once every 6 minutes. Usual care was defined as the patient's physician(s) treating the patient as they wished.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>The primary outcome was ventilator-free days. Prespecified secondary outcomes included all-cause 28-day mortality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 5753 patients screened, 524 were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 43.9 [19.2] years; 394 [75.2%] were male). The median ventilator-free days was 18.4 (IQR, 7.0-25.2) in patients randomized to sighs and 16.1 (IQR, 1.1-24.4) in those receiving usual care alone (P = .08). The unadjusted mean difference in ventilator-free days between groups was 1.9 days (95% CI, 0.1 to 3.6) and the prespecified adjusted mean difference was 1.4 days (95% CI, -0.2 to 3.0). For the prespecified secondary outcome, patients randomized to sighs had 28-day mortality of 11.6% (30/259) vs 17.6% (46/261) in those receiving usual care (P = .05). No differences were observed in nonfatal adverse events comparing patients with sighs (80/259 [30.9%]) vs those without (80/261 [30.7%]).</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In a pragmatic, randomized trial among trauma patients receiving mechanical ventilation with risk factors for developing acute respiratory distress syndrome, the addition of sigh breaths did not significantly increase ventilator-free days. Prespecified secondary outcome data suggest that sighs are well-tolerated and may improve clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02582957.</p>","PeriodicalId":54909,"journal":{"name":"Jama-Journal of the American Medical Association","volume":" ","pages":"1982-1990"},"PeriodicalIF":63.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10600720/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sigh Ventilation in Patients With Trauma: The SiVent Randomized Clinical Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Richard K Albert, Gregory J Jurkovich, John Connett, Erika S Helgeson, Angela Keniston, Helen Voelker, Sarah Lindberg, Jennifer L Proper, Grant Bochicchio, Deborah M Stein, Christian Cain, Ron Tesoriero, Carlos V R Brown, James Davis, Lena Napolitano, Thomas Carver, Mark Cipolle, Luis Cardenas, Joseph Minei, Raminder Nirula, Jay Doucet, Preston R Miller, Jeffrey Johnson, Kenji Inaba, Lillian Kao\",\"doi\":\"10.1001/jama.2023.21739\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Among patients receiving mechanical ventilation, tidal volumes with each breath are often constant or similar. This may lead to ventilator-induced lung injury by altering or depleting surfactant. The role of sigh breaths in reducing ventilator-induced lung injury among trauma patients at risk of poor outcomes is unknown.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine whether adding sigh breaths improves clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>A pragmatic, randomized trial of sigh breaths plus usual care conducted from 2016 to 2022 with 28-day follow-up in 15 academic trauma centers in the US. Inclusion criteria were age older than 18 years, mechanical ventilation because of trauma for less than 24 hours, 1 or more of 5 risk factors for developing acute respiratory distress syndrome, expected duration of ventilation longer than 24 hours, and predicted survival longer than 48 hours.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Sigh volumes producing plateau pressures of 35 cm H2O (or 40 cm H2O for inpatients with body mass indexes >35) delivered once every 6 minutes. Usual care was defined as the patient's physician(s) treating the patient as they wished.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>The primary outcome was ventilator-free days. Prespecified secondary outcomes included all-cause 28-day mortality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 5753 patients screened, 524 were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 43.9 [19.2] years; 394 [75.2%] were male). The median ventilator-free days was 18.4 (IQR, 7.0-25.2) in patients randomized to sighs and 16.1 (IQR, 1.1-24.4) in those receiving usual care alone (P = .08). The unadjusted mean difference in ventilator-free days between groups was 1.9 days (95% CI, 0.1 to 3.6) and the prespecified adjusted mean difference was 1.4 days (95% CI, -0.2 to 3.0). For the prespecified secondary outcome, patients randomized to sighs had 28-day mortality of 11.6% (30/259) vs 17.6% (46/261) in those receiving usual care (P = .05). No differences were observed in nonfatal adverse events comparing patients with sighs (80/259 [30.9%]) vs those without (80/261 [30.7%]).</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In a pragmatic, randomized trial among trauma patients receiving mechanical ventilation with risk factors for developing acute respiratory distress syndrome, the addition of sigh breaths did not significantly increase ventilator-free days. Prespecified secondary outcome data suggest that sighs are well-tolerated and may improve clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02582957.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54909,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Jama-Journal of the American Medical Association\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1982-1990\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":63.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10600720/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Jama-Journal of the American Medical Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2023.21739\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jama-Journal of the American Medical Association","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2023.21739","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

重要性:在接受机械通气的患者中,每次呼吸的潮气量通常是恒定的或相似的。这可能通过改变或消耗表面活性剂而导致呼吸机诱导的肺损伤。在有不良预后风险的创伤患者中,叹息在减少呼吸机引起的肺损伤方面的作用尚不清楚。目的:确定增加叹气是否能改善临床效果。设计、设置和参与者:2016年至2022年在美国15个学术创伤中心进行的一项实用、随机的叹息加常规护理试验,随访28天。纳入标准为年龄超过18岁、因创伤而进行的机械通气时间少于24小时、患急性呼吸窘迫综合征的5个风险因素中的1个或更多,预期通气持续时间超过24小时,预测存活时间超过48小时。干预措施:每6分钟输送一次叹息量,产生35 cm H2O的平台压力(或体重指数>35的住院患者为40 cm H2O)。常规护理被定义为患者的医生按照他们的意愿治疗患者。主要结果和指标:主要结果是无呼吸机天数。预先指定的次要结果包括全因28天死亡率。结果:在5753名筛查患者中,524名入选(平均[SD]年龄43.9[19.2]岁;394名[75.2%]为男性)。随机接受叹息治疗的患者的中位无呼吸机天数为18.4天(IQR,7.0-25.2),单独接受常规护理的患者为16.1天(IQR,1.1-24.4)(P = .08)。两组之间无呼吸机天数的未调整平均差异为1.9天(95%CI,0.1-3.6),预先指定的调整平均差异是1.4天(95%CI,-0.2-3.0)。对于预先指定的次要结果,随机接受叹息治疗的患者28天死亡率为11.6%(30/259),而接受常规护理的患者为17.6%(46/261)(P = .05)。在非致命性不良事件方面,有叹息的患者(80/259[309%])与没有叹息的患者相比(80/261[307%])没有观察到差异。结论和相关性:在一项针对接受机械通气的创伤患者的实用随机试验中,添加叹气并没有显著增加无呼吸机的天数。预先指定的次要结果数据表明,叹息具有良好的耐受性,并可能改善临床结果。试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov标识符:NCT02582957。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Sigh Ventilation in Patients With Trauma: The SiVent Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Among patients receiving mechanical ventilation, tidal volumes with each breath are often constant or similar. This may lead to ventilator-induced lung injury by altering or depleting surfactant. The role of sigh breaths in reducing ventilator-induced lung injury among trauma patients at risk of poor outcomes is unknown.

Objective: To determine whether adding sigh breaths improves clinical outcomes.

Design, setting, and participants: A pragmatic, randomized trial of sigh breaths plus usual care conducted from 2016 to 2022 with 28-day follow-up in 15 academic trauma centers in the US. Inclusion criteria were age older than 18 years, mechanical ventilation because of trauma for less than 24 hours, 1 or more of 5 risk factors for developing acute respiratory distress syndrome, expected duration of ventilation longer than 24 hours, and predicted survival longer than 48 hours.

Interventions: Sigh volumes producing plateau pressures of 35 cm H2O (or 40 cm H2O for inpatients with body mass indexes >35) delivered once every 6 minutes. Usual care was defined as the patient's physician(s) treating the patient as they wished.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was ventilator-free days. Prespecified secondary outcomes included all-cause 28-day mortality.

Results: Of 5753 patients screened, 524 were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 43.9 [19.2] years; 394 [75.2%] were male). The median ventilator-free days was 18.4 (IQR, 7.0-25.2) in patients randomized to sighs and 16.1 (IQR, 1.1-24.4) in those receiving usual care alone (P = .08). The unadjusted mean difference in ventilator-free days between groups was 1.9 days (95% CI, 0.1 to 3.6) and the prespecified adjusted mean difference was 1.4 days (95% CI, -0.2 to 3.0). For the prespecified secondary outcome, patients randomized to sighs had 28-day mortality of 11.6% (30/259) vs 17.6% (46/261) in those receiving usual care (P = .05). No differences were observed in nonfatal adverse events comparing patients with sighs (80/259 [30.9%]) vs those without (80/261 [30.7%]).

Conclusions and relevance: In a pragmatic, randomized trial among trauma patients receiving mechanical ventilation with risk factors for developing acute respiratory distress syndrome, the addition of sigh breaths did not significantly increase ventilator-free days. Prespecified secondary outcome data suggest that sighs are well-tolerated and may improve clinical outcomes.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02582957.

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
48.20
自引率
0.90%
发文量
1569
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) is an international peer-reviewed general medical journal. It has been published continuously since 1883. JAMA is a member of the JAMA Network, which is 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:481959085
Book学术官方微信