Suppr超能文献

19个国家机械通气神经重症监护患者的镇静实践:一项国际队列研究

Sedation Practices in Mechanically Ventilated Neurocritical Care Patients from 19 Countries: An International Cohort Study.

作者信息

Feng Shi Nan, Laws Lindsay H, Diaz-Cruz Camilo, Cinotti Raphael, Schultz Marcus J, Asehnoune Karim, Stevens Robert D, Robba Chiara, Cho Sung-Min

机构信息

Division of Neuroscience Critical Care, Departments of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Department of Neurology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

出版信息

Neurocrit Care. 2025 Jan 7. doi: 10.1007/s12028-024-02200-1.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Our objective was to characterize the impact of common initial sedation practices on invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) duration and in-hospital outcomes in patients with acute brain injury (ABI) and to elucidate variations in practices between high-income and middle-income countries.

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of a prospective observational data registry of neurocritically ill patients requiring IMV. The setting included 73 intensive care units (ICUs) in 18 countries, with a total of 1,450 patients with ABI requiring IMV. There were no interventions.

RESULTS

Patients were categorized into day 1 propofol, midazolam, propofol and midazolam, dexmedetomidine, or sodium thiopental. The primary outcome was duration of IMV. Secondary outcomes were ICU and hospital mortality, ICU length of stay, days to first extubation, extubation failure, and withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy. Multivariable analyses were adjusted for clinically preselected covariates. Of 1,450 included patients (median age 54 years, 66% male), 41.2% (n = 597) were started on propofol, 26.1% (n = 379) were started on midazolam, 19.9% were started on propofol and midazolam, 0.3% (n = 5) were started on sodium thiopental, 0.7% (n = 10) were started on dexmedetomidine, and 11.8% (n = 171) were treated without sedation. After adjustment, there was no significant difference in IMV duration between patients who received midazolam (aβ = 0.64, p = 0.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] - 0.96 to 2.24) or propofol and midazolam (aβ = 0.32, p = 0.46, 95% CI - 1.44 to 2.12) compared with patients who received propofol. Patients who were started on midazolam had an average length of ICU stay that was 2.78 days longer than patients started on propofol (p = 0.003, 95% CI 0.94-4.63). There were no differences in mortality, days to first extubation, extubation failure, or withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy. Patients from high-income countries (n = 1,125) were more likely to receive propofol on day 1 (45.7 vs. 25.5%), whereas patients from middle-income countries (n = 325) were more likely to receive midazolam (32.6 vs. 24.3%) (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In an international registry of patients with ABI requiring IMV, IMV duration did not differ significantly relative to initial sedation strategy. However, patients started on midazolam had longer ICU stay.

摘要

背景

我们的目标是描述常见初始镇静方法对急性脑损伤(ABI)患者有创机械通气(IMV)持续时间和院内结局的影响,并阐明高收入国家和中等收入国家之间的方法差异。

方法

这是一项对需要IMV的神经危重症患者前瞻性观察数据登记的事后分析。研究地点包括18个国家的73个重症监护病房(ICU),共有1450例需要IMV的ABI患者。未进行干预。

结果

患者被分为第1天使用丙泊酚、咪达唑仑、丙泊酚和咪达唑仑、右美托咪定或硫喷妥钠组。主要结局是IMV持续时间。次要结局是ICU和医院死亡率、ICU住院时间、首次拔管天数、拔管失败以及生命维持治疗的撤除。多变量分析对临床预先选择的协变量进行了调整。在1450例纳入患者中(中位年龄54岁,66%为男性),41.2%(n = 597)开始使用丙泊酚,26.1%(n = 379)开始使用咪达唑仑,19.9%开始使用丙泊酚和咪达唑仑,0.3%(n = 5)开始使用硫喷妥钠,0.7%(n = 10)开始使用右美托咪定,11.8%(n = 171)未接受镇静治疗。调整后,接受咪达唑仑(aβ = 0.64,p = 0.43,95%置信区间[CI] -0.96至2.24)或丙泊酚和咪达唑仑(aβ = 0.3!,p = 0.46,95% CI -1.44至2.12)的患者与接受丙泊酚的患者相比,IMV持续时间无显著差异。开始使用咪达唑仑的患者ICU平均住院时间比开始使用丙泊酚的患者长2.78天(p = 0.003,95% CI 0.94 - 4.63)。在死亡率、首次拔管天数、拔管失败或生命维持治疗的撤除方面无差异。来自高收入国家的患者(n = 1125)在第1天更有可能接受丙泊酚(45.7%对25.5%),而来自中等收入国家的患者(n = 325)更有可能接受咪达唑仑(32.6%对24.3%)(p < 0.001)。

结论

在一个需要IMV的ABI患者国际登记中,IMV持续时间相对于初始镇静策略无显著差异。然而,开始使用咪达唑仑的患者ICU住院时间更长。

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