{"title":"急性呼吸窘迫综合征成人患者气道压力释放通气的疗效:临床试验荟萃分析。","authors":"Fatmah Othman, Noura Alsagami, Reem Alharbi, Yara Almuammer, Shatha Alshahrani, Taha Ismaeil","doi":"10.4103/atm.ATM_475_20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To recruit poorly ventilated lung areas by providing active and adequate oxygenation is a core aspect of treating patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) mode is increasingly accepted as a means of supporting patients with ARDS. This study aimed to determine whether the APRV mode is effective in improving oxygenation, compared to conventional ventilation, in adult ARDS patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted the study according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We searched for clinical trials in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library until April 2019. We included all studies comparing APRV and other conventional mechanical ventilation modes for adult ARDS patients. Our primary outcome was oxygenation status (defined as the day 3 PaO<sub>2</sub>/FiO<sub>2</sub> ratio). The secondary outcomes were the length of stay (LOS) in the intensive care unit (ICU) and mortality. Sensitivity analyses were performed including studies with conventional low-tidal volume ventilation as a comparator ventilation strategy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included six clinical trials enrolling a total of 375 patients. The day 3 PaO<sub>2</sub>/FiO<sub>2</sub> was reported in all the studies, and it was significantly higher in patients receiving APRV (mean difference [MD] 51.9 mmHg, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 8.2-95.5, <i>P</i> = 0.02, <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup>= 92%). There was no significant difference in mortality between APRV and the other conventional ventilator modes (risk difference 0.07, 95% CI: -0.01-0.15, <i>P</i> = 0.08, <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup>0%). The point estimate for the effect of APRV on the LOS in ICU indicated a significant reduction in the ICU LOS for the APRV group compared to the counter group (MD 3.1 days, 95% CI 0.4-5.9, <i>P</i> = 0.02, <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup>= 53%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this study, using the APRV mode may improve oxygenation on day 3 and contribute to reducing the LOS in ICU. However, it is difficult to draw a clinical message about APRV, and well-designed clinical trials are required to investigate this issue.</p>","PeriodicalId":50760,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Thoracic Medicine","volume":"16 3","pages":"245-252"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/0e/db/ATM-16-245.PMC8388564.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The efficacy of airway pressure release ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome adult patients: A meta-analysis of clinical trials.\",\"authors\":\"Fatmah Othman, Noura Alsagami, Reem Alharbi, Yara Almuammer, Shatha Alshahrani, Taha Ismaeil\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/atm.ATM_475_20\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To recruit poorly ventilated lung areas by providing active and adequate oxygenation is a core aspect of treating patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) mode is increasingly accepted as a means of supporting patients with ARDS. This study aimed to determine whether the APRV mode is effective in improving oxygenation, compared to conventional ventilation, in adult ARDS patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted the study according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We searched for clinical trials in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library until April 2019. We included all studies comparing APRV and other conventional mechanical ventilation modes for adult ARDS patients. Our primary outcome was oxygenation status (defined as the day 3 PaO<sub>2</sub>/FiO<sub>2</sub> ratio). The secondary outcomes were the length of stay (LOS) in the intensive care unit (ICU) and mortality. Sensitivity analyses were performed including studies with conventional low-tidal volume ventilation as a comparator ventilation strategy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included six clinical trials enrolling a total of 375 patients. The day 3 PaO<sub>2</sub>/FiO<sub>2</sub> was reported in all the studies, and it was significantly higher in patients receiving APRV (mean difference [MD] 51.9 mmHg, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 8.2-95.5, <i>P</i> = 0.02, <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup>= 92%). There was no significant difference in mortality between APRV and the other conventional ventilator modes (risk difference 0.07, 95% CI: -0.01-0.15, <i>P</i> = 0.08, <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup>0%). The point estimate for the effect of APRV on the LOS in ICU indicated a significant reduction in the ICU LOS for the APRV group compared to the counter group (MD 3.1 days, 95% CI 0.4-5.9, <i>P</i> = 0.02, <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup>= 53%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this study, using the APRV mode may improve oxygenation on day 3 and contribute to reducing the LOS in ICU. However, it is difficult to draw a clinical message about APRV, and well-designed clinical trials are required to investigate this issue.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50760,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Thoracic Medicine\",\"volume\":\"16 3\",\"pages\":\"245-252\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/0e/db/ATM-16-245.PMC8388564.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Thoracic Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/atm.ATM_475_20\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/7/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Thoracic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/atm.ATM_475_20","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/7/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:通过提供积极和充分的氧合来招募通风不良的肺部区域是治疗急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)患者的核心方面。气道压力释放通气(APRV)模式作为支持ARDS患者的一种手段越来越被接受。本研究旨在确定在成人ARDS患者中,与传统通气相比,APRV模式是否能有效改善氧合。方法:我们根据系统评价的首选报告项目和荟萃分析指南进行研究。我们在PubMed、Embase、Web of Science和Cochrane图书馆搜索临床试验,直到2019年4月。我们纳入了所有比较成年ARDS患者APRV和其他常规机械通气模式的研究。我们的主要结果是氧合状态(定义为第3天的PaO2/FiO2比率)。次要结果是重症监护室(ICU)的住院时间(LOS)和死亡率。进行了敏感性分析,包括将常规低潮气量通气作为对照通气策略的研究。结果:我们纳入了6项临床试验,共纳入375名患者。所有研究都报告了第3天的PaO2/FiO2,并且在接受APRV的患者中显著更高(平均差异[MD]51.9 mmHg,95%置信区间(CI)8.2-95.5,P=0.02,I2=92%)。APRV和其他常规呼吸机模式的死亡率没有显著差异(风险差异0.07,95%CI:-0.01-0.15,P=0.08,I 20%)。APRV对ICU服务水平影响的点估计表明,与对照组相比,APRV组的ICU服务水平显著降低(MD 3.1天,95%CI 0.4-5.9,P=0.02,I2=53%)。结论:在本研究中,使用APRV模式可以改善第3天的氧合,并有助于降低ICU的LOS。然而,很难得出关于APRV的临床信息,需要精心设计的临床试验来研究这个问题。
The efficacy of airway pressure release ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome adult patients: A meta-analysis of clinical trials.
Background: To recruit poorly ventilated lung areas by providing active and adequate oxygenation is a core aspect of treating patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) mode is increasingly accepted as a means of supporting patients with ARDS. This study aimed to determine whether the APRV mode is effective in improving oxygenation, compared to conventional ventilation, in adult ARDS patients.
Methods: We conducted the study according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We searched for clinical trials in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library until April 2019. We included all studies comparing APRV and other conventional mechanical ventilation modes for adult ARDS patients. Our primary outcome was oxygenation status (defined as the day 3 PaO2/FiO2 ratio). The secondary outcomes were the length of stay (LOS) in the intensive care unit (ICU) and mortality. Sensitivity analyses were performed including studies with conventional low-tidal volume ventilation as a comparator ventilation strategy.
Results: We included six clinical trials enrolling a total of 375 patients. The day 3 PaO2/FiO2 was reported in all the studies, and it was significantly higher in patients receiving APRV (mean difference [MD] 51.9 mmHg, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 8.2-95.5, P = 0.02, I2= 92%). There was no significant difference in mortality between APRV and the other conventional ventilator modes (risk difference 0.07, 95% CI: -0.01-0.15, P = 0.08, I20%). The point estimate for the effect of APRV on the LOS in ICU indicated a significant reduction in the ICU LOS for the APRV group compared to the counter group (MD 3.1 days, 95% CI 0.4-5.9, P = 0.02, I2= 53%).
Conclusion: In this study, using the APRV mode may improve oxygenation on day 3 and contribute to reducing the LOS in ICU. However, it is difficult to draw a clinical message about APRV, and well-designed clinical trials are required to investigate this issue.
期刊介绍:
The journal will cover studies related to multidisciplinary specialties of chest medicine, such as adult and pediatrics pulmonology, thoracic surgery, critical care medicine, respiratory care, transplantation, sleep medicine, related basic medical sciences, and more. The journal also features basic science, special reports, case reports, board review , and more. Editorials and communications to the editor that explore controversial issues and encourage further discussion by physicians dealing with chest medicine.