Prophylactic endotracheal intubation in critically ill patients with upper gastrointestinal bleed: A systematic review and meta-analysis

对上消化道出血危重患者进行预防性气管插管:系统评价和荟萃分析

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Prophylactic endotracheal intubation for airway protection prior to endoscopy for the management of severe upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis is to examine the clinical outcomes and costs related to prophylactic endotracheal intubation compared to no intubation in UGIB. METHODS: EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were used to identify studies through June 2017. Data regarding mortality, total hospital and intensive care unit length of stay (LOS), pneumonia, and cardiovascular events were collected. The DerSimonian-Laird random effects models were used to calculate the inverse variance-based weighted, pooled treatment effect across studies. RESULTS: Seven studies (five manuscripts and two abstracts) were identified (5662 total patients). Prophylactic intubation conferred an increased risk of death (odds ratio [OR], 2.59, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-6.64), hospital LOS (mean difference, 0.96 days, 95% CI: 0.26-1.67), and pneumonia (OR 6.58, 95% CI: 4.91-8.81]) compared to endoscopy without intubation. The LOS-related cost was greater when prophylactic intubation was performed ($9020 per patient, 95% CI: $6962-10 609) compared to when it was not performed ($7510 per patient, 95% CI: $6486-8432). There was no difference in risk of cardiovascular events after sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic intubation in severe UGIB is associated with a greater risk of pneumonia, LOS, death, and cost compared to endoscopy without intubation. Randomized trials examining this issue are warranted.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。