高氧重症监护病房患者的肺部事件:动脉血氧分压与编码疾病有关联吗?回顾性分析

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Medicina Intensiva Pub Date : 2024-09-26 DOI:10.1016/j.medin.2024.04.002
Lubov Stroh , Dennis Nurjadi , Florian Uhle , Thomas Bruckner , Armin Kalenka , Markus Alexander Weigand , Mascha Onida Fiedler-Kalenka
{"title":"高氧重症监护病房患者的肺部事件:动脉血氧分压与编码疾病有关联吗?回顾性分析","authors":"Lubov Stroh ,&nbsp;Dennis Nurjadi ,&nbsp;Florian Uhle ,&nbsp;Thomas Bruckner ,&nbsp;Armin Kalenka ,&nbsp;Markus Alexander Weigand ,&nbsp;Mascha Onida Fiedler-Kalenka","doi":"10.1016/j.medin.2024.04.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Oxygen has been used liberally in ICUs for a long time to prevent hypoxia in ICU- patients. Current evidence suggests that paO<sub>2</sub> &gt;300 mmHg should be avoided, it remains uncertain whether an “optimal level” exists. We investigated how “mild” hyperoxia influences diseases and in-hospital mortality.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>This is a retrospective study.</div></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><div>112 mechanically ventilated ICU-patients were enrolled.</div></div><div><h3>Patients or participants</h3><div>112 ventilated patients were included and categorized into two groups based on the median paO<sub>2</sub> values measured in initial 24 h of mechanical ventilation: normoxia group (paO<sub>2</sub> ≤ 100 mmHg, n = 43) and hyperoxia group patients (paO<sub>2</sub> &gt; 100 mmHg, n = 69).</div></div><div><h3>Interventions</h3><div>No interventions were performed.</div></div><div><h3>Main variables of interest</h3><div>The primary outcome was the incidence of pulmonary events, the secondary outcomes included the incidence of other new organ dysfunctions and in-hospital mortality.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The baseline characteristics, such as age, body mass index, lactate levels, and severity of disease scores, were similar in both groups. There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of pulmonary events, infections, and new organ dysfunctions between the groups. 27 out of 69 patients (39.1%) in the “mild” hyperoxia group and 12 out of 43 patients (27.9%) in the normoxia group died during their ICU or hospital stay (p = 0.54). The mean APACHE Score was 29.4 (SD 7.9) in the normoxia group and 30.0 (SD 6.7) in the hyperoxia group (p = 0.62).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>We found no differences in pulmonary events, other coded diseases, and in-hospital mortality between both groups. It remains still unclear what the \"best oxygen regime\" is for intensive care patients.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49268,"journal":{"name":"Medicina Intensiva","volume":"48 10","pages":"Pages 575-583"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pulmonary Events in ICU patients with hyperoxia: is it possible to relate arterial partial pressure of oxygen to coded diseases? A retrospective analysis\",\"authors\":\"Lubov Stroh ,&nbsp;Dennis Nurjadi ,&nbsp;Florian Uhle ,&nbsp;Thomas Bruckner ,&nbsp;Armin Kalenka ,&nbsp;Markus Alexander Weigand ,&nbsp;Mascha Onida Fiedler-Kalenka\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.medin.2024.04.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Oxygen has been used liberally in ICUs for a long time to prevent hypoxia in ICU- patients. Current evidence suggests that paO<sub>2</sub> &gt;300 mmHg should be avoided, it remains uncertain whether an “optimal level” exists. We investigated how “mild” hyperoxia influences diseases and in-hospital mortality.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>This is a retrospective study.</div></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><div>112 mechanically ventilated ICU-patients were enrolled.</div></div><div><h3>Patients or participants</h3><div>112 ventilated patients were included and categorized into two groups based on the median paO<sub>2</sub> values measured in initial 24 h of mechanical ventilation: normoxia group (paO<sub>2</sub> ≤ 100 mmHg, n = 43) and hyperoxia group patients (paO<sub>2</sub> &gt; 100 mmHg, n = 69).</div></div><div><h3>Interventions</h3><div>No interventions were performed.</div></div><div><h3>Main variables of interest</h3><div>The primary outcome was the incidence of pulmonary events, the secondary outcomes included the incidence of other new organ dysfunctions and in-hospital mortality.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The baseline characteristics, such as age, body mass index, lactate levels, and severity of disease scores, were similar in both groups. There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of pulmonary events, infections, and new organ dysfunctions between the groups. 27 out of 69 patients (39.1%) in the “mild” hyperoxia group and 12 out of 43 patients (27.9%) in the normoxia group died during their ICU or hospital stay (p = 0.54). The mean APACHE Score was 29.4 (SD 7.9) in the normoxia group and 30.0 (SD 6.7) in the hyperoxia group (p = 0.62).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>We found no differences in pulmonary events, other coded diseases, and in-hospital mortality between both groups. It remains still unclear what the \\\"best oxygen regime\\\" is for intensive care patients.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49268,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medicina Intensiva\",\"volume\":\"48 10\",\"pages\":\"Pages 575-583\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medicina Intensiva\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0210569124001396\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicina Intensiva","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0210569124001396","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的长期以来,重症监护室一直大量使用氧气来防止重症监护室病人缺氧。目前的证据表明,应避免使用 paO2 >300 mmHg,但仍不确定是否存在 "最佳水平"。我们调查了 "轻度 "高氧对疾病和院内死亡率的影响。患者或参与者112名接受机械通气的ICU患者被纳入研究,并根据机械通气最初24小时内测得的paO2中位值分为两组:常氧组(paO2 ≤ 100 mmHg,n = 43)和高氧组患者(paO2 > 100 mmHg,n = 69)。结果两组患者的基线特征(如年龄、体重指数、乳酸水平和疾病严重程度评分)相似。两组患者的肺部事件、感染和新器官功能障碍的发生率差异无统计学意义。在重症监护室或住院期间,"轻度 "高氧组 69 名患者中有 27 人(39.1%)死亡,常氧组 43 名患者中有 12 人(27.9%)死亡(P = 0.54)。结论我们发现两组患者在肺部事件、其他编码疾病和院内死亡率方面没有差异。重症监护患者的 "最佳氧疗方案 "是什么仍不清楚。
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
Pulmonary Events in ICU patients with hyperoxia: is it possible to relate arterial partial pressure of oxygen to coded diseases? A retrospective analysis

Objective

Oxygen has been used liberally in ICUs for a long time to prevent hypoxia in ICU- patients. Current evidence suggests that paO2 >300 mmHg should be avoided, it remains uncertain whether an “optimal level” exists. We investigated how “mild” hyperoxia influences diseases and in-hospital mortality.

Design

This is a retrospective study.

Setting

112 mechanically ventilated ICU-patients were enrolled.

Patients or participants

112 ventilated patients were included and categorized into two groups based on the median paO2 values measured in initial 24 h of mechanical ventilation: normoxia group (paO2 ≤ 100 mmHg, n = 43) and hyperoxia group patients (paO2 > 100 mmHg, n = 69).

Interventions

No interventions were performed.

Main variables of interest

The primary outcome was the incidence of pulmonary events, the secondary outcomes included the incidence of other new organ dysfunctions and in-hospital mortality.

Results

The baseline characteristics, such as age, body mass index, lactate levels, and severity of disease scores, were similar in both groups. There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of pulmonary events, infections, and new organ dysfunctions between the groups. 27 out of 69 patients (39.1%) in the “mild” hyperoxia group and 12 out of 43 patients (27.9%) in the normoxia group died during their ICU or hospital stay (p = 0.54). The mean APACHE Score was 29.4 (SD 7.9) in the normoxia group and 30.0 (SD 6.7) in the hyperoxia group (p = 0.62).

Conclusions

We found no differences in pulmonary events, other coded diseases, and in-hospital mortality between both groups. It remains still unclear what the "best oxygen regime" is for intensive care patients.
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
Medicina Intensiva
Medicina Intensiva CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
20.00%
发文量
146
审稿时长
33 days
期刊介绍: Medicina Intensiva is the journal of the Spanish Society of Intensive Care Medicine and Coronary Units (SEMICYUC) and of Pan American and Iberian Federation of Societies of Intensive and Critical Care Medicine. Medicina Intensiva has become the reference publication in Spanish in its field. The journal mainly publishes Original Articles, Reviews, Clinical Notes, Consensus Documents, Images, and other information relevant to the specialty. All works go through a rigorous selection process. The journal accepts submissions of articles in English and in Spanish languages. The journal follows the publication requirements of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
期刊最新文献
Perforación esofágica secundaria a una acalasia Aneurisma de aorta abdominal complicado con fístula aortocava Fragilidad, prevalencia en nuestras unidades de cuidados intensivos y características diferenciales de los pacientes frágiles Seguridad del paciente, ¿qué aportan la simulación clínica y la innovación docente? Análisis de los errores de medicación en Cuidados Intensivos Neonatales: una revisión sistemática
×
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