首页> 外文期刊>Stroke: A Journal of Cerebral Circulation >Stroke-related early tracheostomy versus prolonged orotracheal intubation in neurocritical care trial (SETPOINT): A randomized pilot trial
【24h】

Stroke-related early tracheostomy versus prolonged orotracheal intubation in neurocritical care trial (SETPOINT): A randomized pilot trial

机译:神经重症监护试验(SETPOINT)中风相关的早期气管切开术与经口气管插管延长:一项随机试验

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background and Purpose-: Optimal timing of tracheostomy in ventilated patients with severe stroke is unclear. We aimed to investigate feasibility, safety, and potential advantages of early tracheostomy in these intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Methods-: This prospective, randomized, parallel-group, controlled, open, and outcome-masked pilot trial was conducted in neurologicaleurosurgical ICUs of a university hospital. Patients with severe ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke and an estimated need for at least 2 weeks of ventilation were randomized to either early tracheostomy (within day 1-3 from intubation; early) or to standard tracheostomy (between day 7-14 from intubation if extubation could not be achieved or was not feasible; standard). The primary outcome was length of stay in the ICU; secondary outcomes were diverse aspects of the ICU course. Results-: Sixty patients were randomized and analyzed. No differences were observed with regard to the primary outcome length of stay in the ICU (median 18 [interquartile range 16-28] versus 17 [interquartile range 13-22] days, median difference: 1 [-2 to 6]; P=0.38) or to most secondary outcomes, including adverse effects. Instead, use of sedatives (62% versus 42% of ICU stay, median difference 17.5 [3.3-29.2]; P=0.02), ICU mortality (ICU deaths 3 [10%] versus 14 [47%]; P<0.01) and 6-month mortality (deaths 8 [27%] versus 18 [60%]; P=0.02) were lower in the early group than in the standard group, respectively. Conclusions-: Early tracheostomy in ventilated intensive care stroke patients is feasible, and safe, and presumably reduces sedation need. Whether the suggested benefits in mortality and outcome truly exist has to be determined by a larger multicenter trial. Clinical Trial Registration-: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01261091.
机译:背景与目的:目前尚不清楚在重症中风的通气患者中气管切开术的最佳时机。我们旨在调查在这些重症监护病房(ICU)患者中进行早期气管切开术的可行性,安全性和潜在优势。方法-:该前瞻性,随机,平行分组,对照,开放和掩盖结果的试验性试验在大学医院的神经内科/神经外科ICU中进行。患有严重缺血性或出血性中风且估计需要至少通气2周的患者被随机分为早期气管切开术(从插管开始的第1-3天;早期)或标准气管切开术(从插管开始的第7-14天之间),如果可以拔管无法实现或不可行;标准)。主要结果是在ICU的住院时间。次要结果是ICU课程的各个方面。结果:60例患者进行了随机分析。在ICU的主要结局停留时间方面未观察到差异(中位18 [四分位间距16-28]天与17 [四分位间距13-22]天,中位数差异:1 [-2至6]; P = 0.38)或大多数次要结果,包括不良反应。相反,使用镇静剂(ICU停留时间分别为62%和42%,中位差异为17.5 [3.3-29.2]; P = 0.02),ICU死亡率(ICU死亡3 [10%]对14 [47%]; P <0.01)早期组的6个月和6个月死亡率(死亡8例[27%]对18例[60%]; P = 0.02)分别低于标准组。结论:通气的重症监护卒中患者早期气管切开术是可行,安全的,并且大概可以减少镇静的需要。建议的死亡率和预后益处是否确实存在,必须通过更大的多中心试验来确定。临床试验注册-:http://www.clinicaltrials.gov。唯一标识符:NCT01261091。

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