首页> 外文期刊>BMC Anesthesiology >Effectiveness of heat and moisture exchangers in preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients: a meta-analysis
【24h】

Effectiveness of heat and moisture exchangers in preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients: a meta-analysis

机译:热量和水分交换剂在危重患者中预防呼吸机相关性肺炎的有效性:一项荟萃分析

获取原文

摘要

Background: Patients may acquire ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) by aspirating the condensate that originates in the ventilator circuit upon use of a conventional humidifier. The bacteria that colonize the patients themselves can proliferate in the condensate and then return to the airways and lungs when the patient aspirates this contaminated material. Therefore, the use of HME might contribute to preventing pneumonia and lowering the VAP incidence. The aim of this study was to evaluate how the use of HME impacts the probability of VAP occurrence in critically ill patients. Methods: On the basis of the acronym “PICO” (Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome), the question that guided this review was “Do critically ill patients under invasive mechanical ventilation present lower VAP incidence when they use HME as compared with HH?”. Two of the authors of this review searched the databases PUBMED/ Medline, The Cochrane Library, and Latin-American and Caribbean Literature in Health Sciences, LILACS independently; they used the following keywords: “heat and moisture exchanger”, AND “heated humidifier”, AND “ventilator-associated pneumonia prevention”. This review included papers in the English language published from January 1990 to December 2012. Results: This review included ten studies. Comparison between the use of HME and HH did not reveal any differences in terms of VAP occurrence (OR = 0.998; 95% CI: 0.778–1.281). Together, the ten studies corresponded to a total sample of 1077 and 953 patients in the HME and HH groups, respectively; heterogeneity among the investigations was low (I2 < 50%). Information about the outcome mortality was available in only eight of the ten studies. The use of HME and HH did not afford different results in terms of mortality (OR = 1.09; 95% CI: 0.864–1.376). The total sample size was 884 and 762 patients, respectively. Heterogeneity among the studies was low (I2 = 0.0%). Conclusion: Current meta-analysis was not sufficient to definitely exclude an associate between heat and moisture exchangers and VAP. Despite the methodological limitations found in selected clinical trials, the current meta-analysis suggests that HME does not decrease VAP incidence or mortality in critically ill patients.
机译:背景:患者可能会通过抽吸使用常规加湿器的呼吸机回路中产生的冷凝水而获得呼吸机相关性肺炎(VAP)。当患者吸入这种被污染的物质时,定居在患者体内的细菌会在冷凝液中扩散,然后返回呼吸道和肺部。因此,使用HME可能有助于预防肺炎和降低VAP发生率。这项研究的目的是评估HME的使用如何影响危重患者VAP发生的可能性。方法:基于首字母缩写词“ PICO”(患者,干预,比较,结果),指导本评价的问题是“有创机械通气的危重患者使用HME时的VAP发生率比HH低吗? ”。该评价的两位作者分别搜索了PUBMED / Medline数据库,Cochrane图书馆以及LILACS的拉丁美洲和加勒比健康科学文献。他们使用以下关键字:“热湿交换器”,“加湿器加热”和“与呼吸机相关的肺炎预防”。这篇综述包括1990年1月至2012年12月发表的英语论文。结果:这篇综述包括十项研究。 HME和HH的使用之间的比较没有显示出VAP发生的任何差异(OR = 0.998; 95%CI:0.778-1.281)。总共十项研究分别对应于HME和HH组的1077和953名患者。调查之间的异质性很低(I2 <50%)。十项研究中只有八项可获得关于结局死亡率的信息。在死亡率方面,HME和HH的使用没有提供不同的结果(OR = 1.09; 95%CI:0.864–1.376)。总样本量分别为884和762名患者。研究之间的异质性很低(I2 = 0.0%)。结论:当前的荟萃分析不足以明确排除热湿交换器与VAP之间的联系。尽管在某些临床试验中发现了方法学上的局限性,但当前的荟萃分析表明,HME不会降低危重患者的VAP发病率或死亡率。

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