Early deep-to-light sedation versus continuous light sedation for ICU patients with mechanical ventilation: A cohort study

Abstract

Background

Sedation strategies have not been well established for patients being treated with invasive mechanical ventilation (MV). This study aimed to compare the potential effects of alternative sedation strategies – including early deep-to-light sedation (DTLS), continuous deep sedation (CDS) and continuous light sedation (CLS, the currently recommended strategy) – on ventilator, intensive care unit (ICU) or hospital mortality.

Methods

A cohort study was conducted using two large validated ICU databases, including the Registry of Healthcare-associated Infections in ICUs in China (ICU-HAI) and the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC). Patients who received MV for more than 3 days with one of three sedation strategies were included. Multivariable survival analyses with inverse probability-weighted competing risk models were conducted separately for ICU-HAI and MIMIC cohorts. Adjusted estimates were pooled using fixed-effects models.

Results

In total, 6700 patients (2627 ICU-HAI, 4073 MIMIC) were included in the cohort study, of whom 2689 received CLS, 2079 CDS and 1932 DTLS. Compared to CLS, DTLS was associated with lower ICU mortality (9.3% vs. 11.0%; pooled adjusted HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.66−0.94) and hospital mortality (16.0% vs. 14.1%; 0.86, CI 0.74–1.00); and CDS was associated with higher ventilator mortality (32.8% vs. 7.0%; 4.65, 3.91–5.53), ICU mortality (40.6% vs. 11.0%; 3.39, 2.95–3.90) and hospital mortality (46.8% vs. 14.1%; 3.27, 2.89–3.71) than CLS. All HRs were qualitatively consistent in both cohorts.

Conclusions

Compared to the continuous light sedation, early deep-to-light sedation strategy was associated with improved patient outcomes, and continuous deep sedation was confirmed with poorer patient outcomes.