首页> 外文期刊>JAMA: the Journal of the American Medical Association >Higher vs lower positive end-expiratory pressure in patients with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis.
【24h】

Higher vs lower positive end-expiratory pressure in patients with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis.

机译:急性肺损伤和急性呼吸窘迫综合征患者呼气末正压增高与降低:系统评价和荟萃分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

CONTEXT: Trials comparing higher vs lower levels of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in adults with acute lung injury or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) have been underpowered to detect small but potentially important effects on mortality or to explore subgroup differences. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the association of higher vs lower PEEP with patient-important outcomes in adults with acute lung injury or ARDS who are receiving ventilation with low tidal volumes and to investigate whether these associations differ across prespecified subgroups. DATA SOURCES: Search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (1996-January 2010) plus a hand search of conference proceedings (2004-January 2010). STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers independently screened articles to identify studies randomly assigning adults with acute lung injury or ARDS to treatment with higher vs lower PEEP (with low tidal volume ventilation) and also reporting mortality. DATA EXTRACTION: Data from 2299 individual patients in 3 trials were analyzed using uniform outcome definitions. Prespecified effect modifiers were tested using multivariable hierarchical regression, adjusting for important prognostic factors and clustering effects. RESULTS: There were 374 hospital deaths in 1136 patients (32.9%) assigned to treatment with higher PEEP and 409 hospital deaths in 1163 patients (35.2%) assigned to lower PEEP (adjusted relative risk [RR], 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86-1.04; P = .25). Treatment effects varied with the presence or absence of ARDS, defined by a value of 200 mm Hg or less for the ratio of partial pressure of oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen concentration (P = .02 for interaction). In patients with ARDS (n = 1892), there were 324 hospital deaths (34.1%) in the higher PEEP group and 368 (39.1%) in the lower PEEP group (adjusted RR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.81-1.00; P = .049); in patients without ARDS (n = 404), there were 50 hospital deaths (27.2%) in the higher PEEP group and 44 (19.4%) in the lower PEEP group (adjusted RR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.98-1.92; P = .07). Rates of pneumothorax and vasopressor use were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with higher vs lower levels of PEEP was not associated with improved hospital survival. However, higher levels were associated with improved survival among the subgroup of patients with ARDS.
机译:背景:比较患有急性肺损伤或急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)的成年人的呼气末正压(PEEP)较高或较低水平的试验,不足以检测对死亡率的微小但潜在重要影响或探讨亚组差异。目的:评估在低潮气量通气的急性肺损伤或ARDS成人中,高PEEP值与低值PEEP与患者重要预后的相关性,并调查这些相关性在预定亚组之间是否存在差异。数据来源:检索MEDLINE,EMBASE和Cochrane对照试验中央注册簿(1996年-2010年1月),以及手工检索会议记录(2004年-2010年1月)。研究选择:两名审阅者独立筛选文章,以鉴定研究,随机分配患有急性肺损伤或ARDS的成年人接受较高或较低的PEEP(低潮气量通气)治疗,并报告死亡率。数据提取:使用统一的结果定义分析了3项试验中2299名个体患者的数据。使用多变量分层回归对预先指定的效果修饰语进行测试,并针对重要的预后因素和聚类效果进行调整。结果:1136例(32.9%)患者因PEEP较高而死亡; 1163例(35.2%)患者因PEEP较低而死亡(校正后相对危险度[RR]为0.94; 95%置信区间[9])。 CI],0.86-1.04; P = 0.25)。治疗效果随是否存在ARDS而变化,ARDS的定义是氧气分压与吸入氧气浓度的分数之比等于或小于200 mm Hg(相互作用的P = .02)。在ARDS患者中(n = 1892),较高的PEEP组有324例住院死亡(34.1%),较低的PEEP组有368例(39.1%)死亡(校正后RR,0.90; 95%CI,0.81-1.00; P = .049);在没有ARDS的患者中(n = 404),较高的PEEP组有50例医院死亡(27.2%),较低的PEEP组有44例(19.4%)(校正后RR,1.37; 95%CI,0.98-1.92; P = .07)。气胸和升压药的使用率相似。结论:较高或较低水平的PEEP治疗与改善医院生存率无关。但是,较高的水平与ARDS患者亚组的生存改善相关。

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