{"title":"自主呼吸试验:如何进行,持续多久?","authors":"Arnaud W Thille, François Arrivé, Sylvain Le Pape","doi":"10.1097/MCC.0000000000001227","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Guidelines recommend systematic performance of a spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) before extubation in ICUs, the objective being to reduce the risk of reintubation. In theory, a more challenging SBT performed with a T-piece may further reduce the risk of reintubation, whereas a less challenging SBT performed with pressure-support ventilation (PSV) may hasten extubation.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Recent findings show that a more challenging SBT with a T-piece or for a prolonged duration do not help to reduce the risk of reintubation. In contrast, a less challenging SBT with PSV is easier to pass than a T-piece, and may hasten extubation without increased risk of reintubation. Although SBT with PSV and additional positive end-expiratory pressure is indeed a less challenging SBT, further studies are needed to generalize such an easy trial in daily practice. Earlier screening for a first SBT may also decrease time to extubation without increased risk of reintubation. Lastly, reconnection to the ventilator for a short period after successful SBT facilitates recovery from the SBT-induced alveolar derecruitment.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>Several recent clinical trials have improved assessment of the most adequate way to perform SBT before extubation.</p>","PeriodicalId":10851,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Critical Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Spontaneous breathing trials: how and for how long?\",\"authors\":\"Arnaud W Thille, François Arrivé, Sylvain Le Pape\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/MCC.0000000000001227\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Guidelines recommend systematic performance of a spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) before extubation in ICUs, the objective being to reduce the risk of reintubation. In theory, a more challenging SBT performed with a T-piece may further reduce the risk of reintubation, whereas a less challenging SBT performed with pressure-support ventilation (PSV) may hasten extubation.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Recent findings show that a more challenging SBT with a T-piece or for a prolonged duration do not help to reduce the risk of reintubation. In contrast, a less challenging SBT with PSV is easier to pass than a T-piece, and may hasten extubation without increased risk of reintubation. Although SBT with PSV and additional positive end-expiratory pressure is indeed a less challenging SBT, further studies are needed to generalize such an easy trial in daily practice. Earlier screening for a first SBT may also decrease time to extubation without increased risk of reintubation. Lastly, reconnection to the ventilator for a short period after successful SBT facilitates recovery from the SBT-induced alveolar derecruitment.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>Several recent clinical trials have improved assessment of the most adequate way to perform SBT before extubation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10851,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Opinion in Critical Care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Opinion in Critical Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCC.0000000000001227\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Critical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCC.0000000000001227","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Spontaneous breathing trials: how and for how long?
Purpose of review: Guidelines recommend systematic performance of a spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) before extubation in ICUs, the objective being to reduce the risk of reintubation. In theory, a more challenging SBT performed with a T-piece may further reduce the risk of reintubation, whereas a less challenging SBT performed with pressure-support ventilation (PSV) may hasten extubation.
Recent findings: Recent findings show that a more challenging SBT with a T-piece or for a prolonged duration do not help to reduce the risk of reintubation. In contrast, a less challenging SBT with PSV is easier to pass than a T-piece, and may hasten extubation without increased risk of reintubation. Although SBT with PSV and additional positive end-expiratory pressure is indeed a less challenging SBT, further studies are needed to generalize such an easy trial in daily practice. Earlier screening for a first SBT may also decrease time to extubation without increased risk of reintubation. Lastly, reconnection to the ventilator for a short period after successful SBT facilitates recovery from the SBT-induced alveolar derecruitment.
Summary: Several recent clinical trials have improved assessment of the most adequate way to perform SBT before extubation.
期刊介绍:
Current Opinion in Critical Care delivers a broad-based perspective on the most recent and most exciting developments in critical care from across the world. Published bimonthly and featuring thirteen key topics – including the respiratory system, neuroscience, trauma and infectious diseases – the journal’s renowned team of guest editors ensure a balanced, expert assessment of the recently published literature in each respective field with insightful editorials and on-the-mark invited reviews.