Spontaneous breathing trial with pressure support on positive end-expiratory pressure and extensive use of non-invasive ventilation versus T-piece in difficult-to-wean patients from mechanical ventilation: a randomized controlled trial.
Difficult weaning
Positive end-expiratory pressure
Pressure support
Spontaneous breathing trial
T-piece
Journal
Annals of intensive care
ISSN: 2110-5820
Titre abrégé: Ann Intensive Care
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101562873
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
17 Apr 2024
17 Apr 2024
Historique:
received:
30
11
2023
accepted:
04
04
2024
medline:
17
4
2024
pubmed:
17
4
2024
entrez:
17
4
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The aim of this study is to assess whether a strategy combining spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) with both pressure support (PS) and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and extended use of post-extubation non-invasive ventilation (NIV) (extensively-assisted weaning) would shorten the time until successful extubation as compared with SBT with T-piece (TP) and post-extubation NIV performed in selected patients as advocated by guidelines (standard weaning), in difficult-to-wean patients from mechanical ventilation. The study is a single-center prospective open label, randomized controlled superiority trial with two parallel groups and balanced randomization with a 1:1 ratio. Eligible patients were intubated patients mechanically ventilated for more than 24 h who failed their first SBT using TP. In the extensively-assisted weaning group, SBT was performed with PS (7 cmH From May 2019 to March 2023, 98 patients were included and randomized in the study (49 in each group). Four patients were excluded from the intention-to-treat population (2 in both groups); therefore, 47 patients were analyzed in each group. The extensively-assisted weaning group had a higher median age (68 [58-73] vs. 62 [55-71] yrs.) and similar sex ratio (62% male vs. 57%). Time until successful extubation was not significantly different between extensively-assisted and standard weaning groups (median, 172 [50-436] vs. 95 [47-232] hours, Cox hazard ratio for successful extubation, 0.88 [95% confidence interval: 0.55-1.42] using the standard weaning group as a reference; p = 0.60). All secondary outcomes were not significantly different between groups. An extensively-assisted weaning strategy did not lead to a shorter time to successful extubation than a standard weaning strategy. Trial registration The trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03861117), on March 1, 2019, before the inclusion of the first patient. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03861117 .
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The aim of this study is to assess whether a strategy combining spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) with both pressure support (PS) and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and extended use of post-extubation non-invasive ventilation (NIV) (extensively-assisted weaning) would shorten the time until successful extubation as compared with SBT with T-piece (TP) and post-extubation NIV performed in selected patients as advocated by guidelines (standard weaning), in difficult-to-wean patients from mechanical ventilation.
METHODS
METHODS
The study is a single-center prospective open label, randomized controlled superiority trial with two parallel groups and balanced randomization with a 1:1 ratio. Eligible patients were intubated patients mechanically ventilated for more than 24 h who failed their first SBT using TP. In the extensively-assisted weaning group, SBT was performed with PS (7 cmH
RESULTS
RESULTS
From May 2019 to March 2023, 98 patients were included and randomized in the study (49 in each group). Four patients were excluded from the intention-to-treat population (2 in both groups); therefore, 47 patients were analyzed in each group. The extensively-assisted weaning group had a higher median age (68 [58-73] vs. 62 [55-71] yrs.) and similar sex ratio (62% male vs. 57%). Time until successful extubation was not significantly different between extensively-assisted and standard weaning groups (median, 172 [50-436] vs. 95 [47-232] hours, Cox hazard ratio for successful extubation, 0.88 [95% confidence interval: 0.55-1.42] using the standard weaning group as a reference; p = 0.60). All secondary outcomes were not significantly different between groups.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
An extensively-assisted weaning strategy did not lead to a shorter time to successful extubation than a standard weaning strategy. Trial registration The trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03861117), on March 1, 2019, before the inclusion of the first patient. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03861117 .
Identifiants
pubmed: 38630372
doi: 10.1186/s13613-024-01290-6
pii: 10.1186/s13613-024-01290-6
pmc: PMC11024068
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03861117']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
59Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2017 Mar 15;195(6):772-783
pubmed: 27626706
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2004 Mar 15;169(6):673-8
pubmed: 14726421
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1994 Oct;150(4):896-903
pubmed: 7921460
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2002 Sep;46(8):973-9
pubmed: 12190798
Intensive Care Med. 2010 Jul;36(7):1171-9
pubmed: 20352189
Crit Care Med. 2015 Mar;43(3):613-20
pubmed: 25479115
JAMA. 2021 Mar 23;325(12):1173-1184
pubmed: 33755077
Chest. 2001 Oct;120(4):1262-70
pubmed: 11591570
Lancet Respir Med. 2023 May;11(5):465-476
pubmed: 36693401
Intensive Care Med. 2022 Dec;48(12):1751-1759
pubmed: 36400984
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1997 Aug;156(2 Pt 1):459-65
pubmed: 9279224
Trials. 2022 Dec 12;23(1):993
pubmed: 36503500
Croat Med J. 2004 Apr;45(2):162-6
pubmed: 15103752
N Engl J Med. 1995 Feb 9;332(6):345-50
pubmed: 7823995
Crit Care. 2017 Jun 1;21(1):127
pubmed: 28576127
Crit Care. 2016 Nov 12;20(1):369
pubmed: 27836002
JAMA. 2019 Jun 11;321(22):2175-2182
pubmed: 31184740
N Engl J Med. 2022 Nov 17;387(20):1843-1854
pubmed: 36286317
Chest. 2017 Jan;151(1):166-180
pubmed: 27818331