首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Thoracic Disease >Initial synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation versus assist/control ventilation in treatment of moderate acute respiratory distress syndrome: a prospective randomized controlled trial
【24h】

Initial synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation versus assist/control ventilation in treatment of moderate acute respiratory distress syndrome: a prospective randomized controlled trial

机译:初次同步间歇性强制通气与辅助/控制通气治疗中度急性呼吸窘迫综合征的前瞻性随机对照试验

获取原文
           

摘要

Background: Assist/control (A/C) ventilation may induce delirium in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We conducted a trial to determine whether initial synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation with pressure support (SIMV + PS) could improve clinical outcomes in these patients. Methods: Intubated patients with moderate ARDS were enrolled and we compared SIMV + PS with A/C. Identical sedation, analgesia and ventilation strategies were performed. The co-primary outcomes were early (≤72 h) partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO 2 /FiO 2 ) and incidence of delirium. The secondary outcomes were all-cause in-hospital mortality, dosages of analgesics and sedatives, incidence of patient-ventilator asynchrony, and duration of mechanical ventilation and hospital stay. Results: We screened 2,684 patients and 40 patients were enrolled in our study. In SIMV + PS, early (≤72 h) PaO 2 /FiO 2 was greater improved than that at baseline and that in A/C (P0.05) with lower positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) (8.7±3.0 vs. 10.3±3.2, P0.001) and FiO 2 (58%±18% vs. 67%±19%, P0.001). We found more SIMV + PS success (defined as SIMV + PS successfully applied without switching to A/C) (100.0% vs. 16.7%, P0.001), less male (46.3% vs. 85.7%, P=0.015) and pulmonary etiology of ARDS (53.8% vs. 92.9%, P=0.015), and lower PEEP (9.1±3.1 vs. 10.3±3.3, P=0.004) and FiO 2 (58%±19% vs. 71%±19%, P0.001) in survival patients. However, there were no significant differences in incidence of delirium and mortality, dosages of analgesics and sedatives, incidence of patient-ventilator asynchrony, duration of mechanical ventilation and hospital stay (P>0.05). Conclusions: In patients with moderate ARDS, SIMV + PS can safely and effectively improve oxygenation, but does not decrease mortality, incidence of delirium and patient-ventilator asynchrony, dosages of analgesics and sedatives, and duration of mechanical ventilation and hospital stay.
机译:背景:辅助/控制(A / C)通气可能导致急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)患者出现del妄。我们进行了一项试验,以确定采用压力支持(SIMV + PS)进行的初始同步间歇性强制通气是否可以改善这些患者的临床结局。方法:纳入中度ARDS的气管插管患者,我们将SIMV + PS与A / C进行比较。进行了相同的镇静,镇痛和通气策略。首要的共同结果是动脉氧的早期(≤72h)分压到吸入氧的分数(PaO 2 / FiO 2)和ir妄的发生。次要结果是全因医院死亡率,镇痛药和镇静剂的剂量,患者-呼吸机不同步的发生率,机械通气时间和住院时间。结果:我们筛选了2,684例患者,其中40例患者入选了我们的研究。在SIMV + PS中,早期(≤72h)PaO 2 / FiO 2比基线和A / C(P <0.05)有更大的改善,而呼气末正压(PEEP)较低(8.7±3.0 vs. 10.3±3.2,P <0.001)和FiO 2(58%±18%对67%±19%,P <0.001)。我们发现更多的SIMV + PS成功(定义为SIMV + PS成功应用而未切换到A / C)(100.0%比16.7%,P <0.001),男性更少(46.3%比85.7%,P = 0.015),并且ARDS的肺病因(53.8%vs. 92.9%,P = 0.015),较低的PEEP(9.1±3.1 vs. 10.3±3.3,P = 0.004)和FiO 2(58%±19%vs. 71%±19%) (P <0.001)。然而,del妄和死亡率,镇痛药和镇静剂的剂量,患者-呼吸机不同步的发生率,机械通气的持续时间和住院时间之间均无显着差异(P> 0.05)。结论:对于中度ARDS患者,SIMV + PS可以安全有效地改善氧合,但不会降低死亡率、,妄和患者-呼吸机不同步的发生率,镇痛药和镇静剂的剂量以及机械通气和住院时间。

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