Resp Care
-
In recent years, there has been increasing interest in the use of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in the post-extubation period to shorten the length of invasive ventilation, to prevent extubation failure, and to rescue a failed extubation. The purpose of this review is to summarize the evidence related to the use of NIV in these settings. NIV can be used to allow earlier extubation in selected patients who do not successfully complete a spontaneous breathing trial (SBT). ⋯ In this setting, NIV is indicated only in patients with hypercapnic respiratory failure. Reintubation should not be delayed if NIV is not immediately successful in reversing the post-extubation respiratory failure. Evidence does not support routine use of NIV post-extubation.
-
Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) may reduce the need for intubation in acute respiratory failure (ARF). However, there is no standard method to predict success or failure with NIV. The rapid shallow breathing index (RSBI) is a validated tool for predicting readiness for extubation. We evaluated the ability of the RSBI to predict failure of NIV and mortality in ARF. ⋯ An aRSBI of > 105 is associated with need for intubation and increased in-hospital mortality. Whether patients with an elevated aRSBI could also have benefitted from an increase in NIV settings remains unclear. Validation of this concept in a larger patient population is warranted.
-
Mechanical ventilation is a life-saving supportive therapy, but it can also cause lung injury, diaphragmatic dysfunction, and lung infection. Ventilator liberation should be attempted as soon as clinically indicated, to minimize morbidity and mortality. The most effective method of liberation follows a systematic approach that includes a daily assessment of weaning readiness, in conjunction with interruption of sedation infusions and spontaneous breathing trials. ⋯ Checklists can be used to reinforce application of the protocol, or possibly in lieu of one, particularly in environments where the caregiver-to-patient ratio is high and clinicians are well versed in and dedicated to applying evidence-based care. There is support for integrating best-evidence rules for weaning into the mechanical ventilator so that a substantial portion of the weaning process can be automated, which may be most effective in environments with low caregiver-to-patient ratios or those in which it is challenging to consistently apply evidence-based care. This paper reviews evidence for ventilator liberation protocols and discusses issues of implementation and ongoing monitoring.
-
Review
The ventilator liberation process: update on technique, timing, and termination of tracheostomy.
Tracheostomy is one of the most commonly performed procedures in the ICU. Despite the frequency of the procedure, there remains controversy regarding selection of patients who should undergo tracheostomy, the optimal technique, timing of placement and decannulation, as well as impact on outcome associated with the procedure. A growing body of literature demonstrates that percutaneous tracheostomy performed in the ICU is a safe procedure, even in high risk patients. ⋯ Although there was initial enthusiasm in support of early tracheostomy to improve patient outcomes, repeated studies have been unable to produce robust benefits. The question of optimal timing and location of decannulation has not been answered, but there is some reassurance that in aggregate, across a variety of ICUs, patients do not appear to be harmed by transfer to ward with tracheostomy. Future research into techniques, timing, and termination of tracheostomy is warranted.
-
The ventilator discontinuation process is an essential component of overall ventilator management. Undue delay leads to excess stay, iatrogenic lung injury, unnecessary sedation, and even higher mortality. On the other hand, premature withdrawal can lead to muscle fatigue, dangerous gas exchange impairment, loss of airway protection, and also a higher mortality. ⋯ More recent developments have focused on the utility of computer decision support to guide these processes and the importance of linking sedation reduction protocols to ventilator discontinuation protocols. These guidelines are standing the test of time, and practice patterns are evolving in accordance with them. Nevertheless, there is still room for improvement and need for further clinical studies, especially in the patient requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation.