Cargando…

Prolonged mechanical ventilation in a respiratory-care setting: a comparison of outcome between tracheostomized and translaryngeal intubated patients

INTRODUCTION: Mechanical ventilation of patients may be accomplished by either translaryngeal intubation or tracheostomy. Although numerous intensive care unit (ICU) studies have compared various outcomes between the two techniques, no definitive consensus indicates that tracheostomy is superior. Co...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wu, Yao-Kuang, Tsai, Ying-Huang, Lan, Chou-Chin, Huang, Chun-Yao, Lee, Chih-Hsin, Kao, Kuo-Chin, Fu, Jui-Ying
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2887120/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20193057
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc8890
_version_ 1782182507938054144
author Wu, Yao-Kuang
Tsai, Ying-Huang
Lan, Chou-Chin
Huang, Chun-Yao
Lee, Chih-Hsin
Kao, Kuo-Chin
Fu, Jui-Ying
author_facet Wu, Yao-Kuang
Tsai, Ying-Huang
Lan, Chou-Chin
Huang, Chun-Yao
Lee, Chih-Hsin
Kao, Kuo-Chin
Fu, Jui-Ying
author_sort Wu, Yao-Kuang
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Mechanical ventilation of patients may be accomplished by either translaryngeal intubation or tracheostomy. Although numerous intensive care unit (ICU) studies have compared various outcomes between the two techniques, no definitive consensus indicates that tracheostomy is superior. Comparable studies have not been performed in a respiratory care center (RCC) setting. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study of 985 tracheostomy and 227 translaryngeal intubated patients who received treatment in a 24-bed RCC between November 1999 and December 2005. Treatment and mortality outcomes were compared between tracheostomized and translaryngeal intubated patients, and the factors associated with positive outcomes in all patients were determined. RESULTS: Duration of RCC (22 vs. 14 days) and total hospital stay (82 vs. 64 days) and total mechanical ventilation days (53 vs. 41 days) were significantly longer in tracheostomized patients (all P < 0.05). The rate of in-hospital mortality was significantly higher in the translaryngeal group (45% vs. 31%;P < 0.05). No significant differences were found in weaning success between the groups (both were >55%) or in RCC mortality. Because of significant baseline between-group heterogeneity, case-match analysis was performed. This analysis confirmed the whole cohort findings, except for the fact that a trend for in-hospital mortality was noted to be higher in the translaryngeal group (P = 0.08). Stepwise logistic regression revealed that patients with a lower median severity of disease (APACHE II score <18) who were properly nourished (albumin >2.5 g/dl) or had normal metabolism (BUN <40 mg/dl) were more likely to be successfully weaned and survive (all P < 0.05). Patients who were tracheostomized were also significantly more likely to survive (P < 0.05) CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that the type of mechanical ventilation does not appear to be an important determinant of weaning success in an RCC setting. Focused care administered by experienced providers may be more important for facilitating weaning success than the ventilation method used. However, our findings do suggest that tracheostomy may increase the likelihood of patient survival.
format Text
id pubmed-2887120
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28871202010-06-18 Prolonged mechanical ventilation in a respiratory-care setting: a comparison of outcome between tracheostomized and translaryngeal intubated patients Wu, Yao-Kuang Tsai, Ying-Huang Lan, Chou-Chin Huang, Chun-Yao Lee, Chih-Hsin Kao, Kuo-Chin Fu, Jui-Ying Crit Care Research INTRODUCTION: Mechanical ventilation of patients may be accomplished by either translaryngeal intubation or tracheostomy. Although numerous intensive care unit (ICU) studies have compared various outcomes between the two techniques, no definitive consensus indicates that tracheostomy is superior. Comparable studies have not been performed in a respiratory care center (RCC) setting. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study of 985 tracheostomy and 227 translaryngeal intubated patients who received treatment in a 24-bed RCC between November 1999 and December 2005. Treatment and mortality outcomes were compared between tracheostomized and translaryngeal intubated patients, and the factors associated with positive outcomes in all patients were determined. RESULTS: Duration of RCC (22 vs. 14 days) and total hospital stay (82 vs. 64 days) and total mechanical ventilation days (53 vs. 41 days) were significantly longer in tracheostomized patients (all P < 0.05). The rate of in-hospital mortality was significantly higher in the translaryngeal group (45% vs. 31%;P < 0.05). No significant differences were found in weaning success between the groups (both were >55%) or in RCC mortality. Because of significant baseline between-group heterogeneity, case-match analysis was performed. This analysis confirmed the whole cohort findings, except for the fact that a trend for in-hospital mortality was noted to be higher in the translaryngeal group (P = 0.08). Stepwise logistic regression revealed that patients with a lower median severity of disease (APACHE II score <18) who were properly nourished (albumin >2.5 g/dl) or had normal metabolism (BUN <40 mg/dl) were more likely to be successfully weaned and survive (all P < 0.05). Patients who were tracheostomized were also significantly more likely to survive (P < 0.05) CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that the type of mechanical ventilation does not appear to be an important determinant of weaning success in an RCC setting. Focused care administered by experienced providers may be more important for facilitating weaning success than the ventilation method used. However, our findings do suggest that tracheostomy may increase the likelihood of patient survival. BioMed Central 2010 2010-03-01 /pmc/articles/PMC2887120/ /pubmed/20193057 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc8890 Text en Copyright ©2010 Wu et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://http//creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://http//creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Wu, Yao-Kuang
Tsai, Ying-Huang
Lan, Chou-Chin
Huang, Chun-Yao
Lee, Chih-Hsin
Kao, Kuo-Chin
Fu, Jui-Ying
Prolonged mechanical ventilation in a respiratory-care setting: a comparison of outcome between tracheostomized and translaryngeal intubated patients
title Prolonged mechanical ventilation in a respiratory-care setting: a comparison of outcome between tracheostomized and translaryngeal intubated patients
title_full Prolonged mechanical ventilation in a respiratory-care setting: a comparison of outcome between tracheostomized and translaryngeal intubated patients
title_fullStr Prolonged mechanical ventilation in a respiratory-care setting: a comparison of outcome between tracheostomized and translaryngeal intubated patients
title_full_unstemmed Prolonged mechanical ventilation in a respiratory-care setting: a comparison of outcome between tracheostomized and translaryngeal intubated patients
title_short Prolonged mechanical ventilation in a respiratory-care setting: a comparison of outcome between tracheostomized and translaryngeal intubated patients
title_sort prolonged mechanical ventilation in a respiratory-care setting: a comparison of outcome between tracheostomized and translaryngeal intubated patients
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2887120/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20193057
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc8890
work_keys_str_mv AT wuyaokuang prolongedmechanicalventilationinarespiratorycaresettingacomparisonofoutcomebetweentracheostomizedandtranslaryngealintubatedpatients
AT tsaiyinghuang prolongedmechanicalventilationinarespiratorycaresettingacomparisonofoutcomebetweentracheostomizedandtranslaryngealintubatedpatients
AT lanchouchin prolongedmechanicalventilationinarespiratorycaresettingacomparisonofoutcomebetweentracheostomizedandtranslaryngealintubatedpatients
AT huangchunyao prolongedmechanicalventilationinarespiratorycaresettingacomparisonofoutcomebetweentracheostomizedandtranslaryngealintubatedpatients
AT leechihhsin prolongedmechanicalventilationinarespiratorycaresettingacomparisonofoutcomebetweentracheostomizedandtranslaryngealintubatedpatients
AT kaokuochin prolongedmechanicalventilationinarespiratorycaresettingacomparisonofoutcomebetweentracheostomizedandtranslaryngealintubatedpatients
AT fujuiying prolongedmechanicalventilationinarespiratorycaresettingacomparisonofoutcomebetweentracheostomizedandtranslaryngealintubatedpatients