Emídio Jorge Santos Lima1. 1. Associacao de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Geral de Camacari, BA, Brazil. emidio.lima@gmail.com
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: There is not an ideal predictor of weaning from mechanical ventilation (MV). In a large meta-analysis, despite methodological limitations, respiratory rate (RR) was considered a promising predictor. The aim of this study was to evaluate RR as a predictor of weaning failure from MV. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated 166 patients scheduled for weaning from MV. RR and other essential criteria for weaning were evaluated at an early stage of screening. Patients who met the essential screening criteria for weaning underwent spontaneous breathing trial. RR was compared with the following outcomes: weaning success/failure or extubation failure. RESULTS: Weaning success was present in 76.5% and weaning failure in 17.5% of patients. There were 6% of reintubations. The predictive power for RR weaning failure, RR best cut-off point > 24 breaths per minute (rpm), was: sensitivity 100%, specificity 85%, and accuracy 88% (ROC curve, p<0.0001). Of the patients with weaning failure, 100% were identified by RR during screening (RR cut-off > 24 rpm). There were 15% false positives, weaning successes with RR > 24 rpm. CONCLUSION: RR was an effective predictor of weaning failure. The best cut-off point was RR > 24 rpm, which differed from those reported in the literature (35 and 38 rpm). Only 6% of patients were reintubated, but RR or other weaning criteria did not identify them.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: There is not an ideal predictor of weaning from mechanical ventilation (MV). In a large meta-analysis, despite methodological limitations, respiratory rate (RR) was considered a promising predictor. The aim of this study was to evaluate RR as a predictor of weaning failure from MV. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated 166 patients scheduled for weaning from MV. RR and other essential criteria for weaning were evaluated at an early stage of screening. Patients who met the essential screening criteria for weaning underwent spontaneous breathing trial. RR was compared with the following outcomes: weaning success/failure or extubation failure. RESULTS: Weaning success was present in 76.5% and weaning failure in 17.5% of patients. There were 6% of reintubations. The predictive power for RR weaning failure, RR best cut-off point > 24 breaths per minute (rpm), was: sensitivity 100%, specificity 85%, and accuracy 88% (ROC curve, p<0.0001). Of the patients with weaning failure, 100% were identified by RR during screening (RR cut-off > 24 rpm). There were 15% false positives, weaning successes with RR > 24 rpm. CONCLUSION: RR was an effective predictor of weaning failure. The best cut-off point was RR > 24 rpm, which differed from those reported in the literature (35 and 38 rpm). Only 6% of patients were reintubated, but RR or other weaning criteria did not identify them.