...
首页> 外文期刊>BMJ Open >Effect of protective ventilation on postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing general anaesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
【24h】

Effect of protective ventilation on postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing general anaesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

机译:保护性通气对全麻患者术后肺部并发症的影响:一项随机对照试验的荟萃分析

获取原文

摘要

Objective To determine whether anaesthetised patients undergoing surgery could benefit from intraoperative protective ventilation strategies. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched up to February 2014. Eligible studies evaluated protective ventilation versus conventional ventilation in anaesthetised patients without lung injury at the onset of mechanical ventilation. The primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications. Included studies must report at least one of the following end points: the incidence of atelectasis or acute lung injury or pulmonary infections. Results Four studies (594 patients) were included. Meta-analysis using a random effects model showed a significant decrease in the incidence of atelectasis (OR=0.36; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.60; p0.0001; I2=0%) and pulmonary infections (OR=0.30; 95% CI 0.14 to 0.68; p=0.004; I2=20%) in patients receiving protective ventilation. Ventilation with protective strategies did not reduce the incidence of acute lung injury (OR=0.40; 95% CI 0.07 to 2.15; p=0.28; I2=12%), all-cause mortality (OR=0.77; 95% CI 0.33 to 1.79; p=0.54; I2=0%), length of hospital stay (weighted mean difference (WMD)=?0.52?day, 95% CI ?4.53 to 3.48?day; p=0.80; I2=63%) or length of intensive care unit stay (WMD=?0.55?day, 95% CI ?2.19 to 1.09?day; p=0.51; I2=39%). Conclusions Intraoperative use of protective ventilation strategies has the potential to reduce the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing general anaesthesia. Prospective, well-designed clinical trials are warranted to confirm the beneficial effects of protective ventilation strategies in surgical patients.
机译:目的确定接受麻醉的手术患者是否可以从术中保护性通气策略中受益。方法检索截至2014年2月的MEDLINE,EMBASE和Cochrane对照试验中央记录(CENTRAL)。合格的研究评估了机械通气开始时无肺损伤的麻醉患者的保护通气与常规通气的比较。主要结局是术后肺部并发症的发生率。包括在内的研究必须报告以下至少一项终点:肺不张或急性肺损伤或肺部感染的发生率。结果纳入四项研究(594例患者)。使用随机效应模型的荟萃分析显示肺不张的发生率显着降低(OR = 0.36; 95%CI 0.22至0.60; p <0.0001; I 2 = 0%)和肺部感染( OR = 0.30;接受保护性通气的患者的95%CI为0.14至0.68; p = 0.004; I 2 = 20%)。采用保护性策略通气并不能降低急性肺损伤的发生率(OR = 0.40; 95%CI 0.07至2.15; p = 0.28; I 2 = 12%),全因死亡率(OR = 0.77; 95%CI为0.33至1.79; p = 0.54; I 2 = 0%),住院时间(加权平均差异(WMD)=?0.52?day,95%CI为4.53至3.48天; p = 0.80; I 2 = 63%)或重症监护病房住院时间(WMD = 0.55天),95%CI为2.19至1.09天; p = 0.51; I 2 = 39%)。结论术中使用保护性通气策略有可能降低全麻患者术后肺部并发症的发生率。必须进行精心设计的前瞻性临床试验,以确认保护性通气策略对手术患者的有益作用。

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