首页> 外文期刊>Acute and critical care. >Protecting Postextubation Respiratory Failure and Reintubation by High-Flow Nasal Cannula Compared to Low-Flow Oxygen System: Single Center Retrospective Study and Literature Review
【24h】

Protecting Postextubation Respiratory Failure and Reintubation by High-Flow Nasal Cannula Compared to Low-Flow Oxygen System: Single Center Retrospective Study and Literature Review

机译:与低流量氧气系统相比,通过高流量鼻导管保护拔管后呼吸衰竭和再插管:单中心回顾性研究和文献综述

获取原文
           

摘要

Background Use of a high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) reduced postextubation respiratory failure (PERF) and reintubation rate compared to use of a low-flow oxygen system (LFOS) in low-risk patients. However, no obvious conclusion was reached for high-risk patients. Here, we sought to present the current status of HFNC use as adjunctive oxygen therapy in a clinical setting and to elucidate the nature of the protective effect following extubation. Methods The medical records of 855 patients who were admitted to the intensive care unit of single university hospital during a period of 5.5 years were analyzed retrospectively, with only 118 patients ultimately included in the present research. The baseline characteristics of these patients and the occurrence of PERF and reintubation along with physiologic changes were analyzed. Results Eighty-four patients underwent HFNC, and the remaining 34 patients underwent conventional LFOS after extubation. Physicians preferred HFNC to LFOS in the face of high-risk features including old age, neurologic disease, moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, a long duration of mechanical ventilation, low baseline arterial partial pressure of oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen ratio, and a high baseline alveolar–arterial oxygen difference. The reintubation rate at 72 hours after extubation was not different (9.5% vs. 8.8%; P=1.000). Hypoxic respiratory failure was slightly higher in the nonreintubation group than in the reintubation group (31.9% vs. 6.7%; P=0.058). Regarding physiologic effects, heart rate was only stabilized after 24 hours of extubation in the HFNC group. Conclusions No difference was found in the occurrence of PERF and reintubation between both groups. It is worth noting that similar PERF and reintubation ratios were shown in the HFNC group in those with certain exacerbating risk factors versus not. Caution is needed regarding delayed reintubation in the HFNC group.
机译:背景与低危患者相比,使用低流量氧气系统(LFOS)相比,使用高流量鼻导管(HFNC)可以降低拔管后呼吸衰竭(PERF)和再插管率。但是,对于高危患者没有明显的结论。在这里,我们试图介绍HFNC在临床环境中用作辅助氧疗的当前状况,并阐明拔管后保护作用的性质。方法回顾性分析5.5年来单所大学医院重症监护病房收治的855例患者的病历,本研究最终仅纳入118例患者。分析了这些患者的基线特征以及PERF和再插管的发生以及生理变化。结果84例患者接受了HFNC,拔管后其余34例接受了常规LFOS。面对高风险特征,包括老年,神经系统疾病,中度至重度慢性阻塞性肺疾病,机械通气时间长,氧气的基线动脉分压低,吸氧率低,以及基线肺泡-动脉血氧含量高。拔管后72小时的再插管率没有差异(9.5%比8.8%; P = 1.000)。非再插管组的低氧性呼吸衰竭略高于再插管组(31.9%vs. 6.7%; P = 0.058)。关于生理影响,HFNC组仅在拔管24小时后心率才稳定。结论两组间PERF和再插管的发生率无差异。值得注意的是,HFNC组中显示出相似的PERF和再插管比率,而那些具有某些加剧的危险因素,而没有。 HFNC组应注意延迟再插管。

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