...
首页> 外文期刊>The journal of asthma >Barotrauma not related to type of positive pressure ventilation during severe asthma exacerbations in children.
【24h】

Barotrauma not related to type of positive pressure ventilation during severe asthma exacerbations in children.

机译:气压伤与儿童严重哮喘加重期间的正压通气类型无关。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

BACKGROUND: Children with impending respiratory failure due to severe asthma may be treated with endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation. Barotrauma occurs in a significant number of these children. Non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV) has been used as an alternative intermediary therapy and potentially prevents intubation. However, the comparative risk of barotrauma associated with the use of NPPV has not been evaluated in this population. OBJECTIVE: To determine if the mode of positive pressure delivery per se affects the likelihood of development of barotrauma. METHODS: We retrospectively examined data from all children older than 2 years of age admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) with an asthma exacerbation between April 1997 and August 2006. RESULTS: Of the 293 children admitted to the ICU with asthma, 45 (17%) received treatment with positive pressure ventilation: 11 received only NPPV, 29 were intubated and mechanically ventilated, and 7 children received both of these therapies. Compared with those not requiring positive pressure, children receiving positive pressure were significantly more likely to develop barotrauma during hospitalization (OR 8.9; 95% CI 2.4-32.7). However, the incidence of barotrauma did not significantly differ according to the mode of positive pressure delivery: 9% in those who received only NPPV, 14% in those who were intubated, and 14% in those who received both therapies (p = 0.92). CONCLUSIONS: The use of positive pressure is associated with an increased risk of barotrauma in children with asthma, regardless of the mode of delivery.
机译:背景:可能因严重哮喘而导致呼吸衰竭的儿童可以通过气管插管和机械通气进行治疗。这些儿童中有大量发生气压伤。无创正压通气(NPPV)已被用作替代性中间疗法,并有可能防止插管。但是,尚未在该人群中评估与使用NPPV相关的气压伤的相对危险性。目的:确定正压输送方式本身是否影响气压伤发展的可能性。方法:我们回顾性研究了1997年4月至2006年8月间加重病房(ICU)收治的所有2岁以上儿童的数据。结果:在293例接受ICU收治的哮喘儿童中,45( 17%的患者接受了正压通气治疗:11例仅接受NPPV,29例经插管并机械通气,7例儿童接受了这两种疗法。与不需要正压的孩子相比,接受正压的孩子住院期间发生气压伤的可能性更高(OR 8.9; 95%CI 2.4-32.7)。但是,正压分娩方式的气压伤发生率没有显着差异:仅接受NPPV的患者为9%,接受插管的患者为14%,同时接受两种疗法的患者为14%(p = 0.92) 。结论:无论分娩方式如何,使用正压会增加哮喘患儿气压伤的风险。

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