Suppr超能文献

急性呼吸窘迫综合征机械通气期间重症监护病房的氧疗目标:快速综述

Oxygen targets in the intensive care unit during mechanical ventilation for acute respiratory distress syndrome: a rapid review.

作者信息

Cumpstey Andrew F, Oldman Alex H, Smith Andrew F, Martin Daniel, Grocott Michael Pw

机构信息

Critical Care Research Group, University Hospital of Southampton, Southampton, UK.

Anaesthetics and Intensive Care, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, UK.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Sep 1;9(9):CD013708. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013708.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Supplemental oxygen is frequently administered to patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), including ARDS secondary to viral illness such as coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19). An up-to-date understanding of how best to target this therapy (e.g. arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO) or peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO) aim) in these patients is urgently required.

OBJECTIVES

To address how oxygen therapy should be targeted in adults with ARDS (particularly ARDS secondary to COVID-19 or other respiratory viruses) and requiring mechanical ventilation in an intensive care unit, and the impact oxygen therapy has on mortality, days ventilated, days of catecholamine use, requirement for renal replacement therapy, and quality of life.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase from inception to 15 May 2020 for ongoing or completed randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two review authors independently assessed all records in accordance with standard Cochrane methodology for study selection. We included RCTs comparing supplemental oxygen administration (i.e. different target PaO or SpO ranges) in adults with ARDS and receiving mechanical ventilation in an intensive care setting. We excluded studies exploring oxygen administration in patients with different underlying diagnoses or those receiving non-invasive ventilation, high-flow nasal oxygen, or oxygen via facemask.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One review author performed data extraction, which a second review author checked. We assessed risk of bias in included studies using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. We used the GRADE approach to judge the certainty of the evidence for the following outcomes; mortality at longest follow-up, days ventilated, days of catecholamine use, and requirement for renal replacement therapy.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified one completed RCT evaluating oxygen targets in patients with ARDS receiving mechanical ventilation in an intensive care setting. The study randomized 205 mechanically ventilated patients with ARDS to either conservative (PaO 55 to 70 mmHg, or SpO 88% to 92%) or liberal (PaO 90 to 105 mmHg, or SpO ≥ 96%) oxygen therapy for seven days. Overall risk of bias was high (due to lack of blinding, small numbers of participants, and the trial stopping prematurely), and we assessed the certainty of the evidence as very low. The available data suggested that mortality at 90 days may be higher in those participants receiving a lower oxygen target (odds ratio (OR) 1.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 3.27). There was no evidence of a difference between the lower and higher target groups in mean number of days ventilated (14.0, 95% CI 10.0 to 18.0 versus 14.5, 95% CI 11.8 to 17.1); number of days of catecholamine use (8.0, 95% CI 5.5 to 10.5 versus 7.2, 95% CI 5.9 to 8.4); or participants receiving renal replacement therapy (13.7%, 95% CI 5.8% to 21.6% versus 12.0%, 95% CI 5.0% to 19.1%). Quality of life was not reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We are very uncertain as to whether a higher or lower oxygen target is more beneficial in patients with ARDS and receiving mechanical ventilation in an intensive care setting. We identified only one RCT with a total of 205 participants exploring this question, and rated the risk of bias as high and the certainty of the findings as very low. Further well-conducted studies are urgently needed to increase the certainty of the findings reported here. This review should be updated when more evidence is available.

摘要

背景

急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)患者,包括继发于病毒感染性疾病如冠状病毒病19(COVID-19)的ARDS患者,经常接受补充氧气治疗。目前迫切需要对如何在这些患者中最佳地确定该治疗目标(例如动脉血氧分压(PaO)或外周血氧饱和度(SpO)目标)有最新的认识。

目的

探讨在成人ARDS(特别是继发于COVID-19或其他呼吸道病毒的ARDS)且在重症监护病房需要机械通气的患者中,应如何确定氧疗目标,以及氧疗对死亡率、机械通气天数、使用儿茶酚胺天数、肾脏替代治疗需求和生活质量的影响。

检索方法

我们检索了Cochrane COVID-19研究注册库、Cochrane系统评价数据库、医学期刊数据库(MEDLINE)和荷兰医学文摘数据库(Embase),检索时间从建库至2020年5月15日,以查找正在进行或已完成的随机对照试验(RCT)。

选择标准

两位综述作者根据Cochrane研究选择的标准方法独立评估所有记录。我们纳入了比较在重症监护环境中接受机械通气的ARDS成人患者补充氧气治疗(即不同的目标PaO或SpO范围)的RCT。我们排除了探索不同基础诊断患者的氧气给药情况的研究,以及接受无创通气、高流量鼻导管吸氧或面罩吸氧的患者的研究。

数据收集与分析

一位综述作者进行数据提取,另一位综述作者进行核对。我们使用Cochrane“偏倚风险”工具评估纳入研究的偏倚风险。我们采用GRADE方法判断以下结局证据的确定性:最长随访期的死亡率、机械通气天数、使用儿茶酚胺天数和肾脏替代治疗需求。

主要结果

我们确定了一项已完成的RCT,该研究评估了在重症监护环境中接受机械通气的ARDS患者的氧疗目标。该研究将205例机械通气的ARDS患者随机分为保守氧疗组(PaO 55至70 mmHg,或SpO 88%至92%)或宽松氧疗组(PaO 90至105 mmHg,或SpO≥96%),为期7天。总体偏倚风险较高(由于缺乏盲法、参与者数量少以及试验提前终止),我们将证据的确定性评估为非常低。现有数据表明,接受较低氧疗目标的参与者90天时的死亡率可能更高(优势比(OR)1.83,9%置信区间(CI)1.03至3.27)。在较低和较高目标组之间,平均机械通气天数(14.0,95%CI 10.0至18.0对14.5,95%CI 11.8至17.1)、使用儿茶酚胺天数(8.0,95%CI 5.5至10.5对7.2,95%CI 5.9至8.4)或接受肾脏替代治疗的参与者比例(13.7%,95%CI 5.8%至21.6%对12.0%,95%CI 5.0%至19.1%)均无差异。未报告生活质量情况。

作者结论

对于在重症监护环境中接受机械通气的ARDS患者,较高或较低的氧疗目标哪个更有益,我们非常不确定。我们仅确定了一项共有205名参与者的RCT来探讨这个问题,并将偏倚风险评为高,研究结果的确定性评为非常低。迫切需要进一步开展高质量的研究,以提高此处报告结果的确定性。当有更多证据时,本综述应更新。

相似文献

1
3
Remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Aug 5;8(8):CD014962. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014962.
4
Higher versus lower fractions of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to the intensive care unit.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Sep 13;9(9):CD012631. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012631.pub3.
5
Higher versus lower fraction of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to the intensive care unit.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Nov 27;2019(11):CD012631. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012631.pub2.
6
Convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin for people with COVID-19: a living systematic review.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Jul 10;7(7):CD013600. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013600.pub2.
7
Convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin for people with COVID-19: a rapid review.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 May 14;5(5):CD013600. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013600.
9
Immunonutrition for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in adults.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Jan 24;1(1):CD012041. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012041.pub2.
10
Convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin for people with COVID-19: a living systematic review.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Oct 12;10:CD013600. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013600.pub3.

引用本文的文献

1
Higher versus lower fractions of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to the intensive care unit.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Sep 13;9(9):CD012631. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012631.pub3.
2
Dynamic blood oxygen indices in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients with acute hypoxic respiratory failure: A cohort study.
PLoS One. 2022 Jun 10;17(6):e0269471. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0269471. eCollection 2022.
3
Positioning for acute respiratory distress in hospitalised infants and children.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Jun 6;6(6):CD003645. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003645.pub4.
4
Oxygenation targets in ICU patients with COVID-19: A post hoc subgroup analysis of the HOT-ICU trial.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2022 Jan;66(1):76-84. doi: 10.1111/aas.13977. Epub 2021 Sep 20.
5
Conservative management of COVID-19 associated hypoxaemia.
ERJ Open Res. 2021 Mar 15;7(1). doi: 10.1183/23120541.00026-2021. eCollection 2021 Jan.

本文引用的文献

1
COVID-19: a complex multisystem disorder.
Br J Anaesth. 2020 Sep;125(3):238-242. doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2020.06.013. Epub 2020 Jun 20.
2
COVID-19 Does Not Lead to a "Typical" Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2020 May 15;201(10):1299-1300. doi: 10.1164/rccm.202003-0817LE.
4
Liberal or Conservative Oxygen Therapy for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.
N Engl J Med. 2020 Mar 12;382(11):999-1008. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1916431.
5
The handling oxygenation targets in the intensive care unit (HOT-ICU) trial: Detailed statistical analysis plan.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2020 Jul;64(6):847-856. doi: 10.1111/aas.13569. Epub 2020 Mar 4.
6
The SOFA score-development, utility and challenges of accurate assessment in clinical trials.
Crit Care. 2019 Nov 27;23(1):374. doi: 10.1186/s13054-019-2663-7.
7
Higher versus lower fraction of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to the intensive care unit.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Nov 27;2019(11):CD012631. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012631.pub2.
8
Pharmacological agents for adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Jul 23;7(7):CD004477. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004477.pub3.
9
Data integrity issues: catalyst for a more robust approach to research on perioperative oxygen therapy?
Perioper Med (Lond). 2019 Jul 4;8:7. doi: 10.1186/s13741-019-0118-y. eCollection 2019.
10
Evidence for compromised data integrity in studies of liberal peri-operative inspired oxygen.
Anaesthesia. 2019 May;74(5):573-584. doi: 10.1111/anae.14584. Epub 2019 Feb 17.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验