PURPOSE: Mechanical ventilation with lower tidal volumes (≤6 ml/kg of predicted body weight, PBW) could benefit patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, tidal volume reduction could be associated with increased patient discomfort and sedation needs, and consequent longer duration of ventilation. The aim of this individual patient data meta-analysis was to assess the associations between tidal volume size, duration of mechanical ventilation, and sedation needs in patients without ARDS. METHODS: Studies comparing ventilation with different tidal volume sizes in patients without ARDS were screened for inclusion. Corresponding authors were asked to provide individual participant data. Patients were assigned to three groups based on tidal volume size (≤6 ml/kg PBW, 6-10 ml/kg PBW, or ≥10 ml/kg PBW). Ventilator-free days, alive at day 28, and dose and duration of sedation (propofol and midazolam), analgesia (fentanyl and morphine), and neuromuscular blockade (NMB) were compared. RESULTS: Seven investigations (2,184 patients) were included in the analysis. The number of patients breathing without assistance by day 28 was higher in the group ventilated with tidal volume ≤6 ml/kg PBW compared to those ventilated with tidal volume ≥10 ml/kg PBW (93.1 vs. 88.6%; p = 0.027, respectively). Only two investigations (187 patients) could be included in the meta-analysis of sedation needs. There were neither differences in the percentage of study days that patients received sedatives, opioids, or NMBA nor in the total dose of benzodiazepines, propofol, opioids, and NMBA. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that use of lower tidal volumes in patients without ARDS at the onset of mechanical ventilation could be associated with shorter duration of ventilation. Use of lower tidal volumes seems not to affect sedation or analgesia needs, but this must be confirmed in a robust, well-powered randomized controlled trial.
PURPOSE: Mechanical ventilation with lower tidal volumes (≤6 ml/kg of predicted body weight, PBW) could benefit patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, tidal volume reduction could be associated with increased patient discomfort and sedation needs, and consequent longer duration of ventilation. The aim of this individual patient data meta-analysis was to assess the associations between tidal volume size, duration of mechanical ventilation, and sedation needs in patients without ARDS. METHODS: Studies comparing ventilation with different tidal volume sizes in patients without ARDS were screened for inclusion. Corresponding authors were asked to provide individual participant data. Patients were assigned to three groups based on tidal volume size (≤6 ml/kg PBW, 6-10 ml/kg PBW, or ≥10 ml/kg PBW). Ventilator-free days, alive at day 28, and dose and duration of sedation (propofol and midazolam), analgesia (fentanyl and morphine), and neuromuscular blockade (NMB) were compared. RESULTS: Seven investigations (2,184 patients) were included in the analysis. The number of patients breathing without assistance by day 28 was higher in the group ventilated with tidal volume ≤6 ml/kg PBW compared to those ventilated with tidal volume ≥10 ml/kg PBW (93.1 vs. 88.6%; p = 0.027, respectively). Only two investigations (187 patients) could be included in the meta-analysis of sedation needs. There were neither differences in the percentage of study days that patients received sedatives, opioids, or NMBA nor in the total dose of benzodiazepines, propofol, opioids, and NMBA. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that use of lower tidal volumes in patients without ARDS at the onset of mechanical ventilation could be associated with shorter duration of ventilation. Use of lower tidal volumes seems not to affect sedation or analgesia needs, but this must be confirmed in a robust, well-powered randomized controlled trial.
Authors: Jeremy M Kahn; Liane Andersson; Veena Karir; Nayak L Polissar; Margaret J Neff; Gordon D Rubenfeld Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: G R Bernard; A Artigas; K L Brigham; J Carlet; K Falke; L Hudson; M Lamy; J R Legall; A Morris; R Spragg Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 1994-03 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Sugantha Sundar; Victor Novack; Karinne Jervis; S Patrick Bender; Adam Lerner; Peter Panzica; Feroze Mahmood; Atul Malhotra; Daniel Talmor Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2011-05 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: E Wesley Ely; Ayumi Shintani; Brenda Truman; Theodore Speroff; Sharon M Gordon; Frank E Harrell; Sharon K Inouye; Gordon R Bernard; Robert S Dittus Journal: JAMA Date: 2004-04-14 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Christian Putensen; Nils Theuerkauf; Jörg Zinserling; Hermann Wrigge; Paolo Pelosi Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2009-10-20 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Matthias Haenggi; Sina Blum; Ruth Brechbuehl; Anna Brunello; Stephan M Jakob; Jukka Takala Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2013-08-07 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Yahya Shehabi; Lucy Chan; Suhaini Kadiman; Anita Alias; Wan Nasrudin Ismail; Mohd Ali T Ismail Tan; Tien Meng Khoo; Saedah Binti Ali; Mat Ariffin Saman; Ahmad Shaltut; Cheng Cheng Tan; Cow Yen Yong; Michael Bailey Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2013-01-24 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Corinne Taniguchi; Denise Carnieli-Cazati; Karina T Timenetsky; Cilene Saghabi; Carolina Sant'Anna A Azevedo; Nathalia G Correa; Guilherme P P Schettino; Raquel A C Eid; Ary Serpa Neto Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2016-05-17 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Brian M Fuller; Nicholas M Mohr; Christopher N Miller; Andrew R Deitchman; Brian J Levine; Nicole Castagno; Elizabeth C Hassebroek; Adam Dhedhi; Nicholas Scott-Wittenborn; Edward Grace; Courtney Lehew; Marin H Kollef Journal: Chest Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Fabienne D Simonis; Ary Serpa Neto; Jan M Binnekade; Annemarije Braber; Karina C M Bruin; Rogier M Determann; Geert-Jan Goekoop; Jeroen Heidt; Janneke Horn; Gerard Innemee; Evert de Jonge; Nicole P Juffermans; Peter E Spronk; Lotte M Steuten; Pieter Roel Tuinman; Rob B P de Wilde; Marijn Vriends; Marcelo Gama de Abreu; Paolo Pelosi; Marcus J Schultz Journal: JAMA Date: 2018-11-13 Impact factor: 56.272