4.6 Article

Early postoperative prophylactic noninvasive ventilation after major lung resection in COPD patients: a randomized controlled trial

期刊

INTENSIVE CARE MEDICINE
卷 40, 期 2, 页码 220-227

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00134-013-3150-2

关键词

Non-invasive ventilation; COPD; Thoracic surgery; Acute respiratory failure, postoperative care

资金

  1. Cardif L'Assistance Respiratoire

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: To investigate whether prophylactic postoperative NIV prevents respiratory complications following lung resection surgery in COPD patients. Methods: In seven thoracic surgery departments, 360 COPD patients undergoing lung resection surgery were randomly assigned to two groups: conventional postoperative treatment without (n = 179) or with (n = 181) prophylactic NIV, applied intermittently during 6 h per day for 48 h following surgery. The primary endpoint was the rate of acute respiratory events (ARE) at 30 days postoperatively (ITT analysis). Secondary endpoints were acute respiratory failure (ARF), intubation rate, mortality rate, infectious and non-infectious complications, and duration of ICU and hospital stay. Measurements and main results: ARE rates did not differ between the prophylactic NIV and control groups (57/181, 31.5 vs. 55/179, 30.7 %, p = 0.93). ARF rate was 18.8 % in the prophylactic NIV group and 24.5 % in controls (p = 0.20). Reintubation rates were similar in the prophylactic NIV and control group [10/181 (5.5 %) and 13/179 (7.2 %), respectively, p = 0.53]. Mortality rates were 5 and 2.2 % in the control and prophylactic NIV groups, respectively (p = 0.16). Infectious and non-infectious complication rates, and duration of ICU and hospital stays were similar between groups. Conclusions: Prophylactic postoperative NIV did not reduce the rate of ARE in COPD patients undergoing lung resection surgery and did not influence other postoperative complications rates, mortality rates, and duration of ICU and hospital stay.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据