| Literature DB >> 26714807 |
Andrea Coppadoro1,2, Giacomo Bellani3,4, Alfio Bronco5, Alberto Lucchini6, Simone Bramati7, Vanessa Zambelli8, Roberto Marcolin9, Antonio Pesenti10,11.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Early after intubation, a layer of biofilm covers the inner lumen of the endotracheal tube (ETT). Cleaning the ETT might prevent airways colonization by pathogens, reduce resistance to airflow, and decrease sudden ETT obstruction. We investigated the effectiveness of a cleaning closed suction system in maintaining the endotracheal tube free from secretions.Entities:
Keywords: Biofilm; Cleaning closed suction system; Cross-sectional area; Endotracheal tube; Resistance to airflow; Secretion volume
Year: 2015 PMID: 26714807 PMCID: PMC4695481 DOI: 10.1186/s13613-015-0101-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Intensive Care ISSN: 2110-5820 Impact factor: 6.925
Fig. 1The CONSORT diagram for the study procedures. A total of 40 patients were randomized to receive ETT cleaning (treatment group) or standard care (controls). ECMO extracorporeal membrane oxygenation; CSS closed suction system
Baseline characteristics of the study population
| All patients, | Control group, | Treatment group, |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, years | 69 (51–76) | 67 (53–75) | 73 (49–77) | 0.892 |
| Female sex, | 15 (38) | 7 (35) | 8 (40) | 1.0 |
| BMI | 26 (24–28) | 27 (24–29) | 24 (23–26) | 0.100 |
| SAPS2 | 51 ± 16 | 47 ± 16 | 56 ± 14 | 0.055 |
| PaO2/FiO2a | 228 ± 94 | 214 ± 90 | 241 ± 99 | 0.375 |
| PEEPa, cmH2O | 10 (8–10) | 10 (8–12) | 9 (8–10) | 0.104 |
| Reason for admission, | 0.112 | |||
| Medical | 28 (70) | 11 (55) | 17 (85) | |
| Elective surgery | 5 (12) | 4 (20) | 1 (5) | |
| Emergency surgery | 7 (18) | 5 (25) | 2 (10) | |
| ETT size, mm ID | 7.5 (7.5–7.5) | 7.5 (7.5–8.0) | 7.5 (7.5–7.5) | 0.113 |
| Suspect of pneumonia, | 13 (32) | 6 (30) | 7 (35) | 1.0 |
| ARDS diagnosis, | 6 (15) | 5 (25) | 1 (5) | 0.182 |
BMI body mass index, SAPS2 Simplified acute physiology score II, PEEP positive end-expiratory pressure, ETT endotracheal tube, ID internal diameter, ARDS acute respiratory distress syndrome
aMeasured at intubation
ETT analysis after extubation
| All patients, | Control group, | Treatment group, |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Study ETT in place, days | 5 (3–8) | 5 (3–7) | 5 (3–10) | 0.512 |
| ETT secretions, volume (mL) | 0.274 (0.046–0.576) | 0.568 (0.162–0.756) | 0.081 (0.021–0.306) | 0.001 |
| Average CSA reduction (%) | 3 (1–6) | 6 (2–10) | 1 (0–3) | 0.001 |
| Tracheal aspirate cultures, log (CFU) | 0 (0–5) | 0 (0–3) | 0 (0–5) | 0.234 |
| ETT colonization, log (CFU) | 2 (0–4) | 2 (0–4) | 1 (0–4) | 0.568 |
| Leukocytes in ETT lavage, n. pos. (%) | 6 (15) | 6 (30) | 0 (0) | 0.019 |
ETT endotracheal tube, CSA cross-sectional area, CFU colony forming units, n. pos. number of ETT lavage samples positive for leukocytes presence
Fig. 2Efficacy of the ETT cleaning system. a The volume of ETT secretions increases in the control group (black columns) from the ventilator to the tip side (secretions analyzed dividing the studied ETT length in three equal parts), while it is lower (p < 0.001 by ANOVA) and fairly constant in the treatment group (white columns). b ETT cross-sectional area reduction measured every 5 mm among treatments (white circles) and controls (black circles). The maximum cross-sectional area reduction is markedly lower in the treatment group (dashed lines, p = 0.003). *p < 0.05 as compared to controls
Patient clinical course during ICU stay
| Day 1 treatment | Controls | Day 2 treatment | Controls | Day 3 treatment | Controls | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| mCPIS | 3 (2–5) | 3 (3–5) | 3 (1–4) | 3 (2–5) | 3 (2–4) | 3 (2–4) |
| PaO2/FiO2 ratio | 240 ± 75 | 215 ± 80 | 250 ± 72 | 204 ± 74 | 226 ± 61 | 199 ± 76 |
| Body temperature (°C) | 37.0 (36.5–37.3) | 37.1 (36.5–37.5) | 37 (36.3–37.7) | 37.0 (36.3–37.4) | 37 (36.8–37.5) | 37.1 (36.7–37.7) |
| WBC, | 8.8 (6.4–14.5) | 9.2 (7.5–14.6) | 10 (6.2–16.2) | 10.4 (7.6–14.6) | 8.3 (3.3–12.6) | 8.5 (7.4–12) |
| PCT, ng/ml | 7.4 (2.1–20.8) | 1.8 (0.6–27.6) | 2.8 (0.5–11.1) | 1.8 (0.4–13.1) | 1.91 (0.39–12.91) | 1.2 (0.3–7.3) |
| RX score, | 1 (1–2) | 2 (1–3) | 2 (1–2) | 2 (1–3) | 2 (1–3) | 2 (1–3) |
| TV, mL | 500 ± 110 | 470 ± 100 | 430 ± 60 | 400 ± 90 | 460 ± 80 | 475 ± 140 |
| PEEP, cmH2O | 8 (7–10) | 10 (7–12) | 8 (6–10) | 9 (8–11) | 8 (7–10) | 9 (8–13) |
| CPL, mL/cmH2O | 46 (34–60) | 46 (35–61) | 47 (30–66) | 41 (33-50) | 50 (35–64) | 44 (30–51) |
| Res, cmH2O·L−1·s−1 | 9 (9–11) | 13 (10–15) | 9 (8–11)* | 15 (13–15) | 9 (8–9) | 9 (9) |
| CRP | 11.6 (7.1–29.9) | 17.1 (7.5–32.4) | 16.6 (6.6–25.7) | 15.4 (8.8–22.6) | 15.5 (8.9–31.3) | 9.6 (6.7–22.5) |
mCPIS modified clinical pulmonary infection score, WBC white blood cells, PCT procalcitonin, RX score number of involved quadrants (0–4), TV tidal volume, PEEP positive end-expiratory pressure, CPL compliance, Res resistance to airflow, CRP c-reactive protein
* p < 0.05 as compared to control group