Comparison of Two Extubation Techniques in Critically Ill Adult Subjects: The ExtubAR Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Two orotracheal extubation techniques are described in the literature: the traditional technique and the positive-pressure technique. Although prior studies reported better clinical outcomes with the positive-pressure extubation technique, its superiority has not been extensively studied...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Respiratory Care Vol. 67; no. 1; pp. 76 - 87
Autores principales: Andreu, Mauro, Bertozzi, Matías, Bezzi, Marco, Borello, Silvina, Castro, Daniela, Di Giorgio, Victoria, Aguirre, Mariana
Formato: research tables/charts randomized controlled trial Journal Article
Publicado: Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. Jan2022
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=154455495&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 154455495
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00201324
        4GG
      jtl: Respiratory Care
      issn: 00201324
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Jan2022
      vid: 67
      iid: 1
      pid: 1365
      pub: Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.
      place: New Rochelle, New York
    artinfo:
      ui:
        154455495
        154455495
        154455495
        10.4187/respcare.09276
        154455495
      ppf: 76
      ppct: 11
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
      tig:
        atl: Comparison of Two Extubation Techniques in Critically Ill Adult Subjects: The ExtubAR Randomized Clinical Trial.
      aug:
        au:
          Andreu, Mauro
          Bertozzi, Matías
          Bezzi, Marco
          Borello, Silvina
          Castro, Daniela
          Di Giorgio, Victoria
          Aguirre, Mariana
        affil: Universidad Nacional de la Matanza, Buenos Aires, Argentina
      sug:
        subj:
          Extubation Methods
          Critically Ill Patients In Adulthood
          Positive Pressure Ventilation Methods
          Treatment Outcomes
          Human
          Randomized Controlled Trials
          Random Assignment
          Multicenter Studies
          Confidence Intervals
          Descriptive Statistics
          Patient Safety
          Adult
          Adult: 19-44 years
      ab: BACKGROUND: Two orotracheal extubation techniques are described in the literature: the traditional technique and the positive-pressure technique. Although prior studies reported better clinical outcomes with the positive-pressure extubation technique, its superiority has not been extensively studied yet. This study was to determine whether the positive-pressure orotracheal extubation technique, compared with the traditional orotracheal extubation technique, reduces the incidence of major postextubation complications (up to 60 min) in critically ill adult subjects. METHODS: This was a multi-center randomized clinical trial. Subjects age > 18 y, requiring invasive mechanical ventilation through an endotracheal tube, who met the orotracheal extubation criteria were included and randomized to traditional extubation group (removing the endotracheal tube by applying continuous endotracheal suctioning during the entire procedure) or positive-pressure group (application of pressure support mode at 15/10 cm H2O during cuff deflation and extubation). The primary measure was postextubation major complications, defined as the clinical evidence of at least one of the following: desaturation, upper-airway obstruction, or vomiting. RESULTS: A total of 725 subjects was randomly assigned to the traditional extubation group (n = 358) and positive-pressure group (n = 367). Seventeen subjects were eliminated and not included in the per-protocol analysis. Of 708 subjects, 185 (26.1%) developed at least one major complication. The incidence was 27.8% (96/345) in the traditional group compared with 24.5% (89/363) in the positive-pressure group. No statistically significant differences were observed between the 2 groups (absolute risk 3% [95 CI 23 to 10]; relative risk, 0.88 [95 CI 0.6921.13], P = .32). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the trend toward the positivepressure group, no statistically significant differences were observed. Our findings agree with the literature in that positive-pressure extubation is a safe procedure; therefore, both techniques may be used during extubation in critically ill adult patients.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        research
        tables/charts
        randomized controlled trial
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N