Comparison of Two Extubation Techniques in Critically Ill Adult Subjects: The ExtubAR Randomized Clinical Trial.
airway extubation
extubation complications
extubation methods
positive pressure
positive-pressure extubation
ventilator weaning
Journal
Respiratory care
ISSN: 1943-3654
Titre abrégé: Respir Care
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7510357
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2022
01 2022
Historique:
medline:
19
4
2023
pubmed:
5
11
2021
entrez:
4
11
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Two orotracheal extubation techniques are described in the literature: the traditional technique and the positive-pressure technique. Although prior studies reported better clinical outcomes with the positive-pressure extubation technique, its superiority has not been extensively studied yet. This study was to determine whether the positive-pressure orotracheal extubation technique, compared with the traditional orotracheal extubation technique, reduces the incidence of major postextubation complications (up to 60 min) in critically ill adult subjects. This was a multi-center randomized clinical trial. Subjects age > 18 y, requiring invasive mechanical ventilation through an endotracheal tube, who met the orotracheal extubation criteria were included and randomized to traditional extubation group (removing the endotracheal tube by applying continuous endotracheal suctioning during the entire procedure) or positive-pressure group (application of pressure support mode at 15/10 cm H A total of 725 subjects was randomly assigned to the traditional extubation group ( Despite the trend toward the positive-pressure group, no statistically significant differences were observed. Our findings agree with the literature in that positive-pressure extubation is a safe procedure; therefore, both techniques may be used during extubation in critically ill adult patients.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Two orotracheal extubation techniques are described in the literature: the traditional technique and the positive-pressure technique. Although prior studies reported better clinical outcomes with the positive-pressure extubation technique, its superiority has not been extensively studied yet. This study was to determine whether the positive-pressure orotracheal extubation technique, compared with the traditional orotracheal extubation technique, reduces the incidence of major postextubation complications (up to 60 min) in critically ill adult subjects.
METHODS
This was a multi-center randomized clinical trial. Subjects age > 18 y, requiring invasive mechanical ventilation through an endotracheal tube, who met the orotracheal extubation criteria were included and randomized to traditional extubation group (removing the endotracheal tube by applying continuous endotracheal suctioning during the entire procedure) or positive-pressure group (application of pressure support mode at 15/10 cm H
RESULTS
A total of 725 subjects was randomly assigned to the traditional extubation group (
CONCLUSIONS
Despite the trend toward the positive-pressure group, no statistically significant differences were observed. Our findings agree with the literature in that positive-pressure extubation is a safe procedure; therefore, both techniques may be used during extubation in critically ill adult patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34732586
pii: respcare.09276
doi: 10.4187/respcare.09276
doi:
Types de publication
Randomized Controlled Trial
Multicenter Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
76-86Investigateurs
Karina Miralles
(K)
Diego Noval
(D)
Sebastián Fredes
(S)
Eliana Wilhelm
(E)
Mauricio Zakimchuk
(M)
Julián Buffarini Cignoli
(JB)
Mariana Bernardini
(M)
Leticia Rey
(L)
Valeria Pieroni
(V)
Pablo D'Annunzio
(P)
Gustavo Plotnikow
(G)
Romina Pratto
(R)
Matías Lompizano
(M)
María Guaymas
(M)
Matías Accoce
(M)
Javier Dorado
(J)
Gimena Cardoso
(G)
Patricia Torres
(P)
Vanesa Pavlotsky
(V)
Emiliano Navarro
(E)
Eliana Markman
(E)
Paula Di Nardo
(PD)
Ivonne Kunzi Steyer
(IK)
Carolina Thomsen
(C)
Cecilia Palacios
(C)
Mariela Davies
(M)
Mercedes Ruffo
(M)
Victoria León
(V)
Fernando Tapia
(F)
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 by Daedalus Enterprises.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared no conflicts of interest.