Association between prophylactic intermittent non-invasive positive pressure ventilation and incidence of pneumonia in patients with cervical spinal cord injury: a retrospective single-center cohort study.

IF 2.1 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open Pub Date : 2025-01-04 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1136/tsaco-2024-001631
Yuita Fukuyama, Kazuhiro Okada, Takashi Tagami, Yoshiaki Hara, Shoji Yokobori
{"title":"Association between prophylactic intermittent non-invasive positive pressure ventilation and incidence of pneumonia in patients with cervical spinal cord injury: a retrospective single-center cohort study.","authors":"Yuita Fukuyama, Kazuhiro Okada, Takashi Tagami, Yoshiaki Hara, Shoji Yokobori","doi":"10.1136/tsaco-2024-001631","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patients with cervical spinal cord injuries (CSCIs) have a high incidence of respiratory complications. The effectiveness of non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV) in preventing respiratory complications such as pneumonia in acute CSCIs remains unclear. We evaluated whether intermittent NPPV (iNPPV) could prevent pneumonia in patients with acute CSCIs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This single-center, retrospective study evaluated patients diagnosed with CSCIs with American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale scores of A-C between January 2012 and December 2022. Patients were categorized based on receipt of iNPPV into the iNPPV and usual care groups. Prophylactic iNPPV was defined as the initiation of iNPPV within 72 hours of admission. The primary outcome was the development of pneumonia. The secondary outcomes were other respiratory complications (tracheal intubation and tracheostomy) and adverse events (delirium and vomiting). The groups were compared with regard to outcomes after adjustment for patient backgrounds using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) with propensity scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 213 patients during the study period, 94 were included. Of these, 61 (64.9%) received prophylactic iNPPV. The incidence of pneumonia was 27.9% in the iNPPV group and 48.5% in the usual care group in the unadjusted cohort. In the propensity score analysis using IPTW, the iNPPV group showed a lower incidence of pneumonia than the usual care group (29.0% vs 56.5%, p<0.001). Tracheal intubation and tracheostomy were less common in the iNPPV group than those in the usual care group (10.6% vs 29%; p=0.001 and 10.6% vs 27.1%; p=0.003, respectively). The incidences of delirium and vomiting did not increase in the iNPPV group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Prophylactic iNPPV was associated with a lower incidence of pneumonia in patients with acute CSCIs.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Ⅳ.</p>","PeriodicalId":23307,"journal":{"name":"Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open","volume":"10 1","pages":"e001631"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11749750/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/tsaco-2024-001631","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Patients with cervical spinal cord injuries (CSCIs) have a high incidence of respiratory complications. The effectiveness of non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV) in preventing respiratory complications such as pneumonia in acute CSCIs remains unclear. We evaluated whether intermittent NPPV (iNPPV) could prevent pneumonia in patients with acute CSCIs.

Methods: This single-center, retrospective study evaluated patients diagnosed with CSCIs with American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale scores of A-C between January 2012 and December 2022. Patients were categorized based on receipt of iNPPV into the iNPPV and usual care groups. Prophylactic iNPPV was defined as the initiation of iNPPV within 72 hours of admission. The primary outcome was the development of pneumonia. The secondary outcomes were other respiratory complications (tracheal intubation and tracheostomy) and adverse events (delirium and vomiting). The groups were compared with regard to outcomes after adjustment for patient backgrounds using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) with propensity scores.

Results: Of the 213 patients during the study period, 94 were included. Of these, 61 (64.9%) received prophylactic iNPPV. The incidence of pneumonia was 27.9% in the iNPPV group and 48.5% in the usual care group in the unadjusted cohort. In the propensity score analysis using IPTW, the iNPPV group showed a lower incidence of pneumonia than the usual care group (29.0% vs 56.5%, p<0.001). Tracheal intubation and tracheostomy were less common in the iNPPV group than those in the usual care group (10.6% vs 29%; p=0.001 and 10.6% vs 27.1%; p=0.003, respectively). The incidences of delirium and vomiting did not increase in the iNPPV group.

Conclusions: Prophylactic iNPPV was associated with a lower incidence of pneumonia in patients with acute CSCIs.

Level of evidence: Ⅳ.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
5.00%
发文量
71
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Unpacking the sepsis controversy. Looking toward a career in acute care surgery with a heart centered on service. Management of a traumatic splenic injury in the setting of polysubstance use and challenging social factors. Trauma video review: how long do we curb our enthusiasm? Are electric scooters a lost cause?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1