断奶期间神经调节通气辅助与压力支持通气 随机试验的荟萃分析

Enas Mahdy, Ahmed Abd El-Hamid, Esraa Mohamed Abdalla, Asmaa Mohammed Ebaed
{"title":"断奶期间神经调节通气辅助与压力支持通气 随机试验的荟萃分析","authors":"Enas Mahdy, Ahmed Abd El-Hamid, Esraa Mohamed Abdalla, Asmaa Mohammed Ebaed","doi":"10.21608/bmfj.2024.216982.1839","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Prolonged ventilatory support is associated with poor clinical outcomes. Pressure support ventilation modes, are frequently used in clinical practice but are associated with patient–ventilator asynchrony and deliver fixed levels of assist. Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA), a mode of partial ventilatory assist that reduces patient–ventilator asynchrony compared with other partial support modes for patients with difficult weaning. Objectives: To conduct a meta-analysis comparing neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA) with pressure support ventilation (PSV), in adult ventilated patients & clinical outcomes. Study design: Meta-analysis was used to address this concern. Sittings: Meta-analysis-based study following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines. Methods: Online databases (PubMed, Embase, BioMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials)- were used for randomized studies ever performed in humans with NAVA & PSV in any clinical setting. Results: Twelve studies (n = 799 patients) were included. Regarding the primary outcome, patients weaned with NAVA had a higher success rate compared with pressure support ventilation. For the secondary outcomes, NAVA may reduce duration of mechanical ventilation and hospital mortality and prolongs ventilator-free days when compared with other modes. Conclusion: Our study suggests that the (NAVA) mode may improve the rate of weaning success compared with pressure support ventilation for difficult weaning","PeriodicalId":503219,"journal":{"name":"Benha Medical Journal","volume":"65 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist versus Pressure Support Ventilation during weaning A meta-analysis of randomized trials\",\"authors\":\"Enas Mahdy, Ahmed Abd El-Hamid, Esraa Mohamed Abdalla, Asmaa Mohammed Ebaed\",\"doi\":\"10.21608/bmfj.2024.216982.1839\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Prolonged ventilatory support is associated with poor clinical outcomes. Pressure support ventilation modes, are frequently used in clinical practice but are associated with patient–ventilator asynchrony and deliver fixed levels of assist. Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA), a mode of partial ventilatory assist that reduces patient–ventilator asynchrony compared with other partial support modes for patients with difficult weaning. Objectives: To conduct a meta-analysis comparing neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA) with pressure support ventilation (PSV), in adult ventilated patients & clinical outcomes. Study design: Meta-analysis was used to address this concern. Sittings: Meta-analysis-based study following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines. Methods: Online databases (PubMed, Embase, BioMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials)- were used for randomized studies ever performed in humans with NAVA & PSV in any clinical setting. Results: Twelve studies (n = 799 patients) were included. Regarding the primary outcome, patients weaned with NAVA had a higher success rate compared with pressure support ventilation. For the secondary outcomes, NAVA may reduce duration of mechanical ventilation and hospital mortality and prolongs ventilator-free days when compared with other modes. Conclusion: Our study suggests that the (NAVA) mode may improve the rate of weaning success compared with pressure support ventilation for difficult weaning\",\"PeriodicalId\":503219,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Benha Medical Journal\",\"volume\":\"65 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Benha Medical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21608/bmfj.2024.216982.1839\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Benha Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21608/bmfj.2024.216982.1839","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:长时间的通气支持与不良的临床结果有关。压力支持通气模式在临床实践中经常使用,但与患者-呼吸机不同步有关,而且提供的辅助水平固定。神经调节通气辅助(NAVA)是一种部分通气辅助模式,与其他部分通气辅助模式相比,可减少患者与呼吸机的不同步,适用于难以断奶的患者。研究目的对成人通气患者进行荟萃分析,比较神经调节通气辅助(NAVA)与压力支持通气(PSV)的临床效果。研究设计:采用荟萃分析法解决这一问题。坐位基于 Meta 分析的研究,遵循 PRISMA(系统综述和 Meta 分析首选报告项目)指南。方法:在线数据库(PubMed使用在线数据库(PubMed、Embase、BioMed 和 Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials)--检索在任何临床环境下对人类进行的 NAVA 和 PSV 随机研究。结果:共纳入 12 项研究(n = 799 例患者)。在主要结果方面,与压力支持通气相比,使用 NAVA 断流的患者成功率更高。在次要结果方面,与其他模式相比,NAVA 可缩短机械通气时间,降低住院死亡率,延长无呼吸机天数。结论我们的研究表明,与压力支持通气相比,(NAVA)模式可提高困难断奶患者的断奶成功率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist versus Pressure Support Ventilation during weaning A meta-analysis of randomized trials
Background: Prolonged ventilatory support is associated with poor clinical outcomes. Pressure support ventilation modes, are frequently used in clinical practice but are associated with patient–ventilator asynchrony and deliver fixed levels of assist. Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA), a mode of partial ventilatory assist that reduces patient–ventilator asynchrony compared with other partial support modes for patients with difficult weaning. Objectives: To conduct a meta-analysis comparing neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA) with pressure support ventilation (PSV), in adult ventilated patients & clinical outcomes. Study design: Meta-analysis was used to address this concern. Sittings: Meta-analysis-based study following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines. Methods: Online databases (PubMed, Embase, BioMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials)- were used for randomized studies ever performed in humans with NAVA & PSV in any clinical setting. Results: Twelve studies (n = 799 patients) were included. Regarding the primary outcome, patients weaned with NAVA had a higher success rate compared with pressure support ventilation. For the secondary outcomes, NAVA may reduce duration of mechanical ventilation and hospital mortality and prolongs ventilator-free days when compared with other modes. Conclusion: Our study suggests that the (NAVA) mode may improve the rate of weaning success compared with pressure support ventilation for difficult weaning
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Impact of Metabolic Associated Fatty Liver Disease on Health-Related Quality of Life Comparing Fair Control of Hyperglycemia contrary to Intensive Control in Patients after Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Procedure Comparison of the Onset Time between 0.25% Bupivacaine and 0.5% Bupivacaine for Ultrasound‑Guided Infraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block: A Randomized Clinical Trial Intramedullary Nailing Versus Minmally Invasive Plate Osteosynthesis (MIPO) in Management of Distal Tibial Fractures Correlation between serum estrogen level and endometrial histology in cases of fibroid uterus in peri-menopausal peroid
×
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