首页> 外文期刊>BMC Pulmonary Medicine >High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy versus conventional oxygen therapy in patients with acute respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
【24h】

High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy versus conventional oxygen therapy in patients with acute respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

机译:急性呼吸衰竭患者高流量鼻插管吸氧疗法与常规吸氧疗法的比较:随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析

获取原文
       

摘要

Acute respiratory failure (ARF) is a common and life-threatening medical emergency in patients admitted to the hospital. Currently, there is a lack of large-scale evidence on the use of high-flow nasal cannulas (HFNC) in patients with ARF. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we evaluated whether there were differences between HFNC therapy and conventional oxygen therapy (COT) for treating patients with ARF. The EMBASE, Medline, and Wanfang databases and the Cochrane Library were searched. Two investigators independently collected the data and assessed the quality of each study. Randomized controlled trials that compared HFNC therapy with COT in patients with ARF were included. RevMan 5.3 was used to conduct the meta-analysis. Four studies that involved 703 patients with ARF were included, with 371 patients in the HFNC group and 332 patients in the COT group. In the overall estimates, there were no significant differences between the HFNC and COT groups in the rates of escalation of respiratory support (RR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.37, 1.27; z?=?1.20, P?=?0.23), intubation (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.55, 1.00; z?=?1.95, P?=?0.05), mortality (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.36, 1.88; z?=?0.47, P?=?0.64), or ICU transfer (RR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.57, 2.09; z?=?0.26, P?=?0.79) during ARF treatment. However, the subgroup analysis showed that HFNC therapy may decrease the rate of escalation of respiratory support (RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53, 0.97; z?=?2.15, P?=?0.03) and the intubation rate (RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53, 0.97; z?=?2.15, P?=?0.03) when ARF patients were treated with HFNC therapy for ≥24?h compared with COT. HFNC therapy was similar to COT in ARF patients. The subgroup analysis showed that HFNC therapy may decrease the rate of escalation of respiratory support and the intubation rate when ARF patients were treated with HFNC for ≥24?h compared with COT. Further high-quality, large-scale studies are needed to confirm our results.
机译:急性呼吸衰竭(ARF)是住院患者的常见且危及生命的医疗紧急情况。当前,缺乏关于在ARF患者中使用高流量鼻插管(HFNC)的大规模证据。在这项系统的回顾和荟萃分析中,我们评估了HFNC治疗与常规氧疗(COT)治疗ARF患者之间是否存在差异。搜索了EMBASE,Medline和Wanfang数据库以及Cochrane库。两名研究者独立收集数据并评估每项研究的质量。随机对照试验比较了HFNC治疗和COT治疗ARF患者。 RevMan 5.3用于进行荟萃分析。纳入了涉及703名ARF患者的四项研究,HFNC组为371名患者,COT组为332名患者。在总体估算中,HFNC组和COT组之间的呼吸支持率没有显着差异(RR,0.68; 95%CI,0.37,1.27; z == 1.20,P == 0.23),气管插管(RR,0.74; 95%CI,0.55,1.00; z?=?1.95,P?=?0.05),死亡率(RR,0.82; 95%CI,0.36,1.88; z?=?0.47,P?= ARF治疗期间[?0.64)或ICU转移(RR,1.09; 95%CI,0.57,2.09; z?=?0.26,P?=?0.79)。但是,亚组分析表明,HFNC治疗可能会降低呼吸支持的升级率(RR,0.71; 95%CI,0.53,0.97; z == 2.15,P == 0.03)和插管率(RR,相对于COT,ARF患者接受HFNC治疗≥24?h时,A1 = 0.71; 95%CI,0.53,0.97; z?=?2.15,P?=?0.03)。 HFNC治疗类似于ARF患者的COT。亚组分析显示,与COT相比,HFNC治疗≥24?h的ARF患者,HFNC治疗可能会降低呼吸支持的升级率和插管率。需要进一步的高质量,大规模研究来证实我们的结果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号