Cargando…

Determining a safe upper limit of oxygen supplementation for adult patients: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to describe the connection between the inspired oxygen fraction and pulmonary complications in adult patients, with the objective of determining a safe upper limit of oxygen supplementation. METHODS: MEDLINE and Embase were systematically searched in August 20...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lassen, Mathilde Languille, Risgaard, Bjarke, Baekgaard, Josefine S, Rasmussen, Lars S
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8314741/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34312194
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045057
_version_ 1783729603039199232
author Lassen, Mathilde Languille
Risgaard, Bjarke
Baekgaard, Josefine S
Rasmussen, Lars S
author_facet Lassen, Mathilde Languille
Risgaard, Bjarke
Baekgaard, Josefine S
Rasmussen, Lars S
author_sort Lassen, Mathilde Languille
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to describe the connection between the inspired oxygen fraction and pulmonary complications in adult patients, with the objective of determining a safe upper limit of oxygen supplementation. METHODS: MEDLINE and Embase were systematically searched in August 2019 (updated July 2020) for studies fulfilling the following criteria: intubated adult patients (Population); high fractions of oxygen (Intervention) versus low fractions of (Comparison); atelectasis, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), pneumonia and/or duration of mechanical ventilation (Outcome); original studies both observational and interventional (Studies). Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment was done by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: Out of 6120 records assessed for eligibility, 12 were included. Seven studies were conducted in the emergency setting, and five studies included patients undergoing elective surgery. Eight studies reported data on atelectasis, two on ARDS, four on pneumonia and two on duration of mechanical ventilation. There was a non-significant increased risk of atelectasis if an oxygen fraction of 0.8 or above was used, relative risk (RR): 1.37 (95% CI 0.95 to 1.96). One study showed an almost threefold higher risk of pneumonia in the high oxygen fraction group (RR: 2.83 (95% CI 2.25 to 3.56)). The two studies reporting ARDS and the two studies with data on mechanical ventilation showed no association with oxygen fraction. Four studies had a high risk of bias in one domain. CONCLUSIONS: In this systematic review, we found inadequate evidence to identify a safe upper dosage of oxygen, but the identified studies suggest a benefit of keeping inspiratory oxygen fraction below 0.8 with regard to formation of atelectases. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020154242.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8314741
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83147412021-08-13 Determining a safe upper limit of oxygen supplementation for adult patients: a systematic review Lassen, Mathilde Languille Risgaard, Bjarke Baekgaard, Josefine S Rasmussen, Lars S BMJ Open Anaesthesia OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to describe the connection between the inspired oxygen fraction and pulmonary complications in adult patients, with the objective of determining a safe upper limit of oxygen supplementation. METHODS: MEDLINE and Embase were systematically searched in August 2019 (updated July 2020) for studies fulfilling the following criteria: intubated adult patients (Population); high fractions of oxygen (Intervention) versus low fractions of (Comparison); atelectasis, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), pneumonia and/or duration of mechanical ventilation (Outcome); original studies both observational and interventional (Studies). Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment was done by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: Out of 6120 records assessed for eligibility, 12 were included. Seven studies were conducted in the emergency setting, and five studies included patients undergoing elective surgery. Eight studies reported data on atelectasis, two on ARDS, four on pneumonia and two on duration of mechanical ventilation. There was a non-significant increased risk of atelectasis if an oxygen fraction of 0.8 or above was used, relative risk (RR): 1.37 (95% CI 0.95 to 1.96). One study showed an almost threefold higher risk of pneumonia in the high oxygen fraction group (RR: 2.83 (95% CI 2.25 to 3.56)). The two studies reporting ARDS and the two studies with data on mechanical ventilation showed no association with oxygen fraction. Four studies had a high risk of bias in one domain. CONCLUSIONS: In this systematic review, we found inadequate evidence to identify a safe upper dosage of oxygen, but the identified studies suggest a benefit of keeping inspiratory oxygen fraction below 0.8 with regard to formation of atelectases. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020154242. BMJ Publishing Group 2021-07-26 /pmc/articles/PMC8314741/ /pubmed/34312194 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045057 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Anaesthesia
Lassen, Mathilde Languille
Risgaard, Bjarke
Baekgaard, Josefine S
Rasmussen, Lars S
Determining a safe upper limit of oxygen supplementation for adult patients: a systematic review
title Determining a safe upper limit of oxygen supplementation for adult patients: a systematic review
title_full Determining a safe upper limit of oxygen supplementation for adult patients: a systematic review
title_fullStr Determining a safe upper limit of oxygen supplementation for adult patients: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Determining a safe upper limit of oxygen supplementation for adult patients: a systematic review
title_short Determining a safe upper limit of oxygen supplementation for adult patients: a systematic review
title_sort determining a safe upper limit of oxygen supplementation for adult patients: a systematic review
topic Anaesthesia
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8314741/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34312194
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045057
work_keys_str_mv AT lassenmathildelanguille determiningasafeupperlimitofoxygensupplementationforadultpatientsasystematicreview
AT risgaardbjarke determiningasafeupperlimitofoxygensupplementationforadultpatientsasystematicreview
AT baekgaardjosefines determiningasafeupperlimitofoxygensupplementationforadultpatientsasystematicreview
AT rasmussenlarss determiningasafeupperlimitofoxygensupplementationforadultpatientsasystematicreview