Troy Ellens, R. Kaur, K. Roehl, Meagan N Dubosky, D. Vines
{"title":"通气当量供氧作为拔管结局预测指标:一项初步研究","authors":"Troy Ellens, R. Kaur, K. Roehl, Meagan N Dubosky, D. Vines","doi":"10.29390/cjrt-2019-007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction Weaning predictors can help liberate patients in a timely manner from mechanical ventilation. Ventilatory equivalent for oxygen (VEqO2), a surrogate for work of breathing and a measure of the efficiency of breathing, may be an important noninvasive alternative to other weaning predictors. Our study’s purpose was to observe any differences in VEqO2 between extubation outcome groups. Methods Employing a metabolic cart, oxygen consumption (V˙O2), minute volume (VE), tidal volume (VT), and breathing frequency were recorded during a spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) to calculate VEqO2 and the rapid shallow breathing index (RSBI) in 34 adult participants in the intensive care unit. Five-breath means of VEqO2 and the RSBI collected throughout the SBT were examined between SBT pass and fail groups and extubation pass and fail groups using the Mann–Whitney U test with p < 0.05. Results Data from 31 participants were analyzed between SBT outcome groups. Data from 20 participants were examined for extubation outcome after a successful SBT. Median (interquartile range) VEqO2 was not different between extubation groups. Participants who passed the SBT had a higher median VEqO2 than those who did not at the midpoint (25.3 L/L V˙O2 [22–33 L/L V˙O2] vs. 23.7 L/L V˙O2 [18–24 L/L V˙O2], p = 0.035) and at the end (25.5 L/L V˙O2 [23–34 L/L V˙O2] vs. 21.3 L/L V˙O2 [20–24 L/L V˙O2], p = 0.017) of the SBT. Discussion VEqO2 may show differences in SBT outcomes, but not differences between extubation outcomes. VEqO2 may be able to detect differences in work during an SBT, but may not be able to predict change in workload in the respiratory system after extubation. The small sample size may also have prevented any differences in extubation outcomes to be shown. Conclusion VEqO2 was higher in patients that passed their SBT. VEqO2 was not useful in identifying extubation success or failure in adult mechanically ventilated patients.","PeriodicalId":9533,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Respiratory Therapy: CJRT = Revue Canadienne de la Thérapie Respiratoire : RCTR","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ventilatory equivalent for oxygen as an extubation outcome predictor: A pilot study\",\"authors\":\"Troy Ellens, R. Kaur, K. Roehl, Meagan N Dubosky, D. Vines\",\"doi\":\"10.29390/cjrt-2019-007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction Weaning predictors can help liberate patients in a timely manner from mechanical ventilation. Ventilatory equivalent for oxygen (VEqO2), a surrogate for work of breathing and a measure of the efficiency of breathing, may be an important noninvasive alternative to other weaning predictors. Our study’s purpose was to observe any differences in VEqO2 between extubation outcome groups. Methods Employing a metabolic cart, oxygen consumption (V˙O2), minute volume (VE), tidal volume (VT), and breathing frequency were recorded during a spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) to calculate VEqO2 and the rapid shallow breathing index (RSBI) in 34 adult participants in the intensive care unit. Five-breath means of VEqO2 and the RSBI collected throughout the SBT were examined between SBT pass and fail groups and extubation pass and fail groups using the Mann–Whitney U test with p < 0.05. Results Data from 31 participants were analyzed between SBT outcome groups. Data from 20 participants were examined for extubation outcome after a successful SBT. Median (interquartile range) VEqO2 was not different between extubation groups. Participants who passed the SBT had a higher median VEqO2 than those who did not at the midpoint (25.3 L/L V˙O2 [22–33 L/L V˙O2] vs. 23.7 L/L V˙O2 [18–24 L/L V˙O2], p = 0.035) and at the end (25.5 L/L V˙O2 [23–34 L/L V˙O2] vs. 21.3 L/L V˙O2 [20–24 L/L V˙O2], p = 0.017) of the SBT. Discussion VEqO2 may show differences in SBT outcomes, but not differences between extubation outcomes. VEqO2 may be able to detect differences in work during an SBT, but may not be able to predict change in workload in the respiratory system after extubation. The small sample size may also have prevented any differences in extubation outcomes to be shown. Conclusion VEqO2 was higher in patients that passed their SBT. VEqO2 was not useful in identifying extubation success or failure in adult mechanically ventilated patients.\",\"PeriodicalId\":9533,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Journal of Respiratory Therapy: CJRT = Revue Canadienne de la Thérapie Respiratoire : RCTR\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-07-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Journal of Respiratory Therapy: CJRT = Revue Canadienne de la Thérapie Respiratoire : RCTR\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.29390/cjrt-2019-007\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Respiratory Therapy: CJRT = Revue Canadienne de la Thérapie Respiratoire : RCTR","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29390/cjrt-2019-007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
摘要
脱机预测可以帮助患者及时脱离机械通气。呼吸当量氧(VEqO2)作为呼吸功的替代指标和呼吸效率的衡量指标,可能是其他脱机预测指标的重要无创替代指标。我们研究的目的是观察拔管结果组之间VEqO2的差异。方法采用代谢车,记录34例重症监护病房成人患者自主呼吸试验(SBT)期间的耗氧量(V˙O2)、分气量(VE)、潮气量(VT)和呼吸频率,计算VEqO2和快速浅呼吸指数(RSBI)。采用Mann-Whitney U检验,比较SBT通过组和拔管通过组和拔管失败组之间VEqO2和RSBI的五次呼吸均值,p < 0.05。结果31名参与者的数据在SBT结果组之间进行了分析。来自20名参与者的数据被检查成功的SBT后拔管结果。拔管组间VEqO2中位数(四分位数范围)无差异。通过SBT的参与者在SBT中点(25.3 L/L V˙O2 [22-33 L/L V˙O2] vs. 23.7 L/L V˙O2 [18-24 L/L V˙O2], p = 0.035)和结束时(25.5 L/L V˙O2 [23-34 L/L V˙O2] vs. 21.3 L/L V˙O2 [20-24 L/L V˙O2], p = 0.017)的VEqO2中位数高于未通过SBT的参与者。VEqO2可能显示SBT结果的差异,但不显示拔管结果之间的差异。VEqO2可能能够检测SBT期间工作的差异,但可能无法预测拔管后呼吸系统工作量的变化。小样本量也可能阻止了拔管结果的任何差异。结论通过SBT的患者VEqO2较高。VEqO2在成人机械通气患者拔管成功或失败的判断中没有作用。
Ventilatory equivalent for oxygen as an extubation outcome predictor: A pilot study
Introduction Weaning predictors can help liberate patients in a timely manner from mechanical ventilation. Ventilatory equivalent for oxygen (VEqO2), a surrogate for work of breathing and a measure of the efficiency of breathing, may be an important noninvasive alternative to other weaning predictors. Our study’s purpose was to observe any differences in VEqO2 between extubation outcome groups. Methods Employing a metabolic cart, oxygen consumption (V˙O2), minute volume (VE), tidal volume (VT), and breathing frequency were recorded during a spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) to calculate VEqO2 and the rapid shallow breathing index (RSBI) in 34 adult participants in the intensive care unit. Five-breath means of VEqO2 and the RSBI collected throughout the SBT were examined between SBT pass and fail groups and extubation pass and fail groups using the Mann–Whitney U test with p < 0.05. Results Data from 31 participants were analyzed between SBT outcome groups. Data from 20 participants were examined for extubation outcome after a successful SBT. Median (interquartile range) VEqO2 was not different between extubation groups. Participants who passed the SBT had a higher median VEqO2 than those who did not at the midpoint (25.3 L/L V˙O2 [22–33 L/L V˙O2] vs. 23.7 L/L V˙O2 [18–24 L/L V˙O2], p = 0.035) and at the end (25.5 L/L V˙O2 [23–34 L/L V˙O2] vs. 21.3 L/L V˙O2 [20–24 L/L V˙O2], p = 0.017) of the SBT. Discussion VEqO2 may show differences in SBT outcomes, but not differences between extubation outcomes. VEqO2 may be able to detect differences in work during an SBT, but may not be able to predict change in workload in the respiratory system after extubation. The small sample size may also have prevented any differences in extubation outcomes to be shown. Conclusion VEqO2 was higher in patients that passed their SBT. VEqO2 was not useful in identifying extubation success or failure in adult mechanically ventilated patients.