Elinaldo da Conceição dos Santos , Renan Lima Monteiro , Juliana Ribeiro Fonseca Franco de Macedo , William Poncin , Adriana Claudia Lunardi
{"title":"预防性无创正压通气可减少侵入性胸腔手术后的并发症和住院时间:系统性综述。","authors":"Elinaldo da Conceição dos Santos , Renan Lima Monteiro , Juliana Ribeiro Fonseca Franco de Macedo , William Poncin , Adriana Claudia Lunardi","doi":"10.1016/j.jphys.2024.08.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Question</h3><div>In patients undergoing invasive thoracic procedures, what are the effects of prophylactic non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIV)?</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised trials. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro scale and the certainty of evidence with the GRADE approach.</div></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><div>Patients undergoing invasive thoracic procedures.</div></div><div><h3>Intervention</h3><div>Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or bi-level positive airway pressure (BiPAP).</div></div><div><h3>Outcome measures</h3><div>Length of hospital stay, postoperative pulmonary complications, need for tracheal intubation, mortality, hypoxaemia, pulmonary function and adverse events. Meta-analysis was performed for all outcomes. Subgroup analyses estimated the effects of CPAP and BIPAP independently.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Sixteen trials with 1,814 participants were included. The average quality of the included studies was fair. Moderate certainty evidence indicated that NIV reduces postoperative pulmonary complications (RD –0.09, 95% CI –0.15 to –0.04) without increasing the rate of adverse events (RD 0.01, 95% CI –0.02 to 0.04). Low certainty evidence indicated that NIV reduces length of hospital stay (MD –1.4 days, 95% CI –2.2 to –0.5) compared with usual care. The effects on intubation and mortality rates were very close to no effect, indicating that NIV is safe. Subgroup analyses showed that the evidence for CPAP had more precise estimates that that for BiPAP.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>NIV reduces postoperative pulmonary complications and length of stay after invasive chest procedures without increasing the risk of adverse events.</div></div><div><h3>Registration</h3><div>PROSPERO CRD42015019004.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49153,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Physiotherapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prophylactic non-invasive positive pressure ventilation reduces complications and length of hospital stay after invasive thoracic procedures: a systematic review\",\"authors\":\"Elinaldo da Conceição dos Santos , Renan Lima Monteiro , Juliana Ribeiro Fonseca Franco de Macedo , William Poncin , Adriana Claudia Lunardi\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jphys.2024.08.008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Question</h3><div>In patients undergoing invasive thoracic procedures, what are the effects of prophylactic non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIV)?</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised trials. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro scale and the certainty of evidence with the GRADE approach.</div></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><div>Patients undergoing invasive thoracic procedures.</div></div><div><h3>Intervention</h3><div>Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or bi-level positive airway pressure (BiPAP).</div></div><div><h3>Outcome measures</h3><div>Length of hospital stay, postoperative pulmonary complications, need for tracheal intubation, mortality, hypoxaemia, pulmonary function and adverse events. Meta-analysis was performed for all outcomes. Subgroup analyses estimated the effects of CPAP and BIPAP independently.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Sixteen trials with 1,814 participants were included. The average quality of the included studies was fair. Moderate certainty evidence indicated that NIV reduces postoperative pulmonary complications (RD –0.09, 95% CI –0.15 to –0.04) without increasing the rate of adverse events (RD 0.01, 95% CI –0.02 to 0.04). Low certainty evidence indicated that NIV reduces length of hospital stay (MD –1.4 days, 95% CI –2.2 to –0.5) compared with usual care. The effects on intubation and mortality rates were very close to no effect, indicating that NIV is safe. Subgroup analyses showed that the evidence for CPAP had more precise estimates that that for BiPAP.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>NIV reduces postoperative pulmonary complications and length of stay after invasive chest procedures without increasing the risk of adverse events.</div></div><div><h3>Registration</h3><div>PROSPERO CRD42015019004.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49153,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Physiotherapy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Physiotherapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1836955324000845\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Physiotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1836955324000845","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
问题在接受侵入性胸腔手术的患者中,预防性无创正压通气(NIV)的效果如何?对随机试验进行系统回顾和荟萃分析。采用 PEDro 量表评估方法学质量,并采用 GRADE 方法评估证据的确定性:干预:干预措施:持续气道正压(CPAP)或双水平气道正压(BiPAP):住院时间、术后肺部并发症、气管插管需求、死亡率、低氧血症、肺功能和不良事件。对所有结果进行了 Meta 分析。亚组分析分别估算了 CPAP 和 BIPAP 的效果:结果:共纳入 16 项试验,1,814 名参与者。纳入研究的平均质量尚可。中度确定性证据表明,NIV可减少术后肺部并发症(RD -0.09,95% CI -0.15至-0.04),但不会增加不良事件的发生率(RD 0.01,95% CI -0.02至0.04)。低确定性证据表明,与常规护理相比,NIV可缩短住院时间(MD -1.4天,95% CI -2.2至-0.5)。对插管率和死亡率的影响非常接近于无影响,这表明 NIV 是安全的。分组分析表明,CPAP 的证据比 BiPAP 的证据有更精确的估计值:结论:NIV 可减少胸部侵入性手术后的肺部并发症和住院时间,同时不会增加不良事件的风险:注册:PREMCORD42015019004。
Prophylactic non-invasive positive pressure ventilation reduces complications and length of hospital stay after invasive thoracic procedures: a systematic review
Question
In patients undergoing invasive thoracic procedures, what are the effects of prophylactic non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIV)?
Design
Systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised trials. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro scale and the certainty of evidence with the GRADE approach.
Length of hospital stay, postoperative pulmonary complications, need for tracheal intubation, mortality, hypoxaemia, pulmonary function and adverse events. Meta-analysis was performed for all outcomes. Subgroup analyses estimated the effects of CPAP and BIPAP independently.
Results
Sixteen trials with 1,814 participants were included. The average quality of the included studies was fair. Moderate certainty evidence indicated that NIV reduces postoperative pulmonary complications (RD –0.09, 95% CI –0.15 to –0.04) without increasing the rate of adverse events (RD 0.01, 95% CI –0.02 to 0.04). Low certainty evidence indicated that NIV reduces length of hospital stay (MD –1.4 days, 95% CI –2.2 to –0.5) compared with usual care. The effects on intubation and mortality rates were very close to no effect, indicating that NIV is safe. Subgroup analyses showed that the evidence for CPAP had more precise estimates that that for BiPAP.
Conclusion
NIV reduces postoperative pulmonary complications and length of stay after invasive chest procedures without increasing the risk of adverse events.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Physiotherapy is the official journal of the Australian Physiotherapy Association. It aims to publish high-quality research with a significant impact on global physiotherapy practice. The journal's vision is to lead the field in supporting clinicians to access, understand, and implement research evidence that will enhance person-centred care. In January 2008, the Journal of Physiotherapy became the first physiotherapy journal to adhere to the ICMJE requirement of registering randomized trials with a recognized Trial Registry. The journal prioritizes systematic reviews, clinical trials, economic analyses, experimental studies, qualitative studies, epidemiological studies, and observational studies. In January 2014, it also became the first core physiotherapy/physical therapy journal to provide free access to editorials and peer-reviewed original research. The Australian Physiotherapy Association extended their support for excellence in physiotherapy practice by sponsoring open access publication of all Journal of Physiotherapy content in 2016. As a result, all past, present, and future journal articles are freely accessible, and there are no author fees for publication.