Cargando…

Proportional modes versus pressure support ventilation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Proportional modes (proportional assist ventilation, PAV, and neurally adjusted ventilatory assist, NAVA) could improve patient–ventilator interaction and consequently may be efficient as a weaning mode. The purpose of this systematic review is to examine whether proportional modes impro...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kataoka, Jun, Kuriyama, Akira, Norisue, Yasuhiro, Fujitani, Shigeki
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6288104/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30535648
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13613-018-0470-y
_version_ 1783379732415381504
author Kataoka, Jun
Kuriyama, Akira
Norisue, Yasuhiro
Fujitani, Shigeki
author_facet Kataoka, Jun
Kuriyama, Akira
Norisue, Yasuhiro
Fujitani, Shigeki
author_sort Kataoka, Jun
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Proportional modes (proportional assist ventilation, PAV, and neurally adjusted ventilatory assist, NAVA) could improve patient–ventilator interaction and consequently may be efficient as a weaning mode. The purpose of this systematic review is to examine whether proportional modes improved patient–ventilator interaction and whether they had an impact on the weaning success and length of mechanical ventilation, in comparison with PSV. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception through May 13, 2018. We included both parallel-group and crossover randomized studies that examined the efficacy of proportional modes in comparison with PSV in mechanically ventilated adults. The primary outcomes were (1) asynchrony index (AI), (2) weaning failure, and (3) duration of mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: We included 15 studies (four evaluated PAV, ten evaluated NAVA, and one evaluated both modes). Although the use of proportional modes was not associated with a reduction in AI (WMD − 1.43; 95% CI − 3.11 to 0.25; p = 0.096; PAV—one study, and NAVA—seven studies), the use of proportional modes was associated with a reduction in patients with AI > 10% (RR 0.15; 95% CI 0.04–0.58; p = 0.006; PAV—two studies, and NAVA—five studies), compared with PSV. There was a significant heterogeneity among studies for AI, especially with NAVA. Compared with PSV, use of proportional modes was associated with a reduction in weaning failure (RR 0.44; 95% CI 0.26–0.75; p = 0.003; PAV—three studies) and duration of mechanical ventilation (WMD − 1.78 days; 95% CI − 3.24 to − 0.32; p = 0.017; PAV—three studies, and NAVA—two studies). Reduced duration of mechanical ventilation was found with PAV but not with NAVA. CONCLUSION: The use of proportional modes was associated with a reduction in the incidence with AI > 10%, weaning failure and duration of mechanical ventilation, compared with PSV. However, reduced weaning failure and duration of mechanical ventilation were found with only PAV. Due to a significant heterogeneity among studies and an insufficient number of studies, further investigation seems warranted to better understand the impact of proportional modes. Clinical trial registration PROSPERO registration number, CRD42017059791. Registered 20 March 2017 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13613-018-0470-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6288104
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62881042018-12-27 Proportional modes versus pressure support ventilation: a systematic review and meta-analysis Kataoka, Jun Kuriyama, Akira Norisue, Yasuhiro Fujitani, Shigeki Ann Intensive Care Research BACKGROUND: Proportional modes (proportional assist ventilation, PAV, and neurally adjusted ventilatory assist, NAVA) could improve patient–ventilator interaction and consequently may be efficient as a weaning mode. The purpose of this systematic review is to examine whether proportional modes improved patient–ventilator interaction and whether they had an impact on the weaning success and length of mechanical ventilation, in comparison with PSV. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception through May 13, 2018. We included both parallel-group and crossover randomized studies that examined the efficacy of proportional modes in comparison with PSV in mechanically ventilated adults. The primary outcomes were (1) asynchrony index (AI), (2) weaning failure, and (3) duration of mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: We included 15 studies (four evaluated PAV, ten evaluated NAVA, and one evaluated both modes). Although the use of proportional modes was not associated with a reduction in AI (WMD − 1.43; 95% CI − 3.11 to 0.25; p = 0.096; PAV—one study, and NAVA—seven studies), the use of proportional modes was associated with a reduction in patients with AI > 10% (RR 0.15; 95% CI 0.04–0.58; p = 0.006; PAV—two studies, and NAVA—five studies), compared with PSV. There was a significant heterogeneity among studies for AI, especially with NAVA. Compared with PSV, use of proportional modes was associated with a reduction in weaning failure (RR 0.44; 95% CI 0.26–0.75; p = 0.003; PAV—three studies) and duration of mechanical ventilation (WMD − 1.78 days; 95% CI − 3.24 to − 0.32; p = 0.017; PAV—three studies, and NAVA—two studies). Reduced duration of mechanical ventilation was found with PAV but not with NAVA. CONCLUSION: The use of proportional modes was associated with a reduction in the incidence with AI > 10%, weaning failure and duration of mechanical ventilation, compared with PSV. However, reduced weaning failure and duration of mechanical ventilation were found with only PAV. Due to a significant heterogeneity among studies and an insufficient number of studies, further investigation seems warranted to better understand the impact of proportional modes. Clinical trial registration PROSPERO registration number, CRD42017059791. Registered 20 March 2017 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13613-018-0470-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer International Publishing 2018-12-10 /pmc/articles/PMC6288104/ /pubmed/30535648 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13613-018-0470-y Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Research
Kataoka, Jun
Kuriyama, Akira
Norisue, Yasuhiro
Fujitani, Shigeki
Proportional modes versus pressure support ventilation: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Proportional modes versus pressure support ventilation: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Proportional modes versus pressure support ventilation: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Proportional modes versus pressure support ventilation: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Proportional modes versus pressure support ventilation: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Proportional modes versus pressure support ventilation: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort proportional modes versus pressure support ventilation: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6288104/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30535648
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13613-018-0470-y
work_keys_str_mv AT kataokajun proportionalmodesversuspressuresupportventilationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT kuriyamaakira proportionalmodesversuspressuresupportventilationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT norisueyasuhiro proportionalmodesversuspressuresupportventilationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT fujitanishigeki proportionalmodesversuspressuresupportventilationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis