Literature DB >> 27716405

Noninvasive ventilation for avoidance of reintubation in patients with various cough strength.

Jun Duan1, Xiaoli Han2, Shicong Huang2, Linfu Bai2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Reintubation is associated with high mortality. Identification of methods to avoid reintubation is needed. The aim of this study was to assess whether prophylactic noninvasive ventilation (NIV) would benefit patients with various cough strengths.
METHODS: We prospectively enrolled 356 patients who successfully passed a spontaneous breathing trial in a respiratory intensive care unit. Before extubation, cough peak flow was measured. After extubation, attending physicians determined whether the patients would receive prophylactic NIV or conventional oxygen treatment (control group). Patients were followed up to 90 days postextubation or death, whichever came first.
RESULTS: The median value of cough peak flow was 70 L/minute. Among the patients with cough peak flow ≤70 L/minute, 108 received NIV and 72 received conventional oxygen treatment. In this cohort, NIV reduced reintubation (9 % vs. 35 % at postextubation 72 h, p < 0.01; and 24 % vs. 49 % at postextubation 7 days, p < 0.01) and postextubation 90-day mortality (43 % vs. 61 %, p = 0.02) compared with the control group. Further, use of NIV was an independent protective factor for reintubation (OR = 0.19, p < 0.01 at 72 h postextubation; and OR = 0.33, p < 0.01 at 7 days postextubation) and for death at 90 days postextubation (OR = 0.40, p = 0.02). Among patients with cough peak flow >70 L/minute, 71 received NIV and 105 received conventional oxygen treatment. In this cohort, NIV did not reduce reintubation (6 % vs. 6 % at 72 h postextubation, p > 0.99; and 9 % vs. 9 % at 7 days postextubation, p > 0.99) or postextubation 90-day mortality (21 % vs. 15 %, p = 0.32) compared with the control group. Further, use of NIV was not associated with reintubation or postextubation 90-day mortality.
CONCLUSION: In a planned extubated population, prophylactic NIV benefited patients with weak cough but possibly not in patients with strong cough.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cough strength; Noninvasive ventilation; Reintubation; Ventilator weaning

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27716405      PMCID: PMC5054598          DOI: 10.1186/s13054-016-1493-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care        ISSN: 1364-8535            Impact factor:   9.097


Background

Cough strength has been widely used to manage patients being removed from mechanical ventilation after a successful weaning test [1-6]. It is positively correlated with respiratory muscle strength [7]. Patients with weak cough are more likely to experience reintubation [1-6], and reintubation is associated with an eightfold increase in nosocomial pneumonia and a fivefold increase in death [8, 9]. Thus, it is necessary to identify effective methods to avoid reintubation. Immediate use of prophylactic noninvasive ventilation (NIV) after extubation reduces reintubation in patients at high risk for extubation failure [10-13]. However, only one study enrolled patients with weak cough [13]. In that study, the authors enrolled only two patients with weak cough in the NIV group and three in the control group [13]. With such a small sample size, they failed to demonstrate the efficacy of prophylactic NIV in patients with weak cough. Further, to the best of our knowledge, no study to date has reported the efficacy of NIV in patients with strong cough. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine whether prophylactic NIV would benefit patients with various cough strengths.

Methods

The institutional review board of the First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University approved this study. We prospectively enrolled patients who were scheduled for extubation after a successful spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) in a respiratory intensive care unit (ICU). We excluded patients younger than 18 years of age, with presence of a tracheostomy, or who refused to participate. Before enrollment, we obtained informed consent from the participants or their family members. We managed the patients per our hospital’s protocols [6]. Every morning, we assessed each patient with regard to whether he or she met the criteria for removal of mechanical ventilation. We undertook an SBT if the following criteria were met: improvement or resolution of the underlying cause of acute respiratory failure, correction of arterial hypoxemia (ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen [PaO2/FiO2] ≥150, positive end-expiratory pressure ≤5 cmH2O), body temperature ≤38 °C, respiratory rate ≤30 breaths/minute, heart rate ≤120 beats/minute, and hemodynamic stability [14, 15]. The SBT was carried out in pressure support ventilation mode for 120 minutes. The support pressure was set at 6 cmH2O for an endotracheal tube inner diameter ≥7.5 mm and at 8 cmH2O for an endotracheal tube inner diameter <7.5 mm [14, 16]. We defined failure of the SBT as the presence one of the following criteria: respiratory rate ≥35 breaths/minute; frequency/tidal volume (rapid shallow breathing index) >105; peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) <90 % at FiO2 ≥ 0.5; heart rate ≥140 or ≤50 beats/minute; systolic blood pressure ≥180 or ≤90 mmHg; diminishing consciousness or diaphoresis; and clinical signs indicating respiratory muscle fatigue, labored breathing, or both. If no signs of SBT failure appeared after 120 minutes, the extubation was performed at the discretion of the attending physicians. Before extubation, we recorded data for physiological variables, including Glasgow Coma Scale score. At the same time, from the nurse recording sheet, we recorded the suction frequency and volume of secretions preceding 24 h of extubation. We also measured the cough peak flow using a portable spirometer (Chestgraph HI-101; Chest M.I., Tokyo, Japan) [6]. Before measurement, we elevated the head of the bed to 30–45 degrees, cleared the airway secretions by suction, and oxygenated the patient with 100 % oxygen for 2 minutes. Next, we disconnected the ventilator, connected the spirometer to the endotracheal tube, and coached the patient to cough with as much effort as possible. We measured coughs three times, and the highest value was chosen. To avoid bias, the attending physicians were blind to the value of cough peak flow. Cough peak flow less than the median value was defined as weak cough. After extubation, the attending physician determined whether the patient received prophylactic NIV or conventional oxygen treatment. We did not predefine the criteria for NIV. However, patients with weak hand-grip strength, high partial pressure of carbon dioxide in arterial blood, high Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, low PaO2, and small volume of secretions were more likely to be ordered to receive prophylactic NIV. Prophylactic NIV (BiPAP Vision or V60; Philips Respironics, Monroeville, PA, USA) was immediately used after extubation. The face mask was the first choice. The appropriate size of the mask was selected according to the patient’s facial type. If a patient did not tolerate a face mask, a nasal mask was tried. The parameters of the ventilator were adjusted as follows. Expiratory positive airway pressure was set at 4–6 cmH2O. Inspiratory positive airway pressure was adjusted by increments of 1–2 cmH2O to obtain a tidal volume of around 8 ml/kg or to the maximum tolerated level for each patient. Usually, the inspiratory positive airway pressure was maintained at 12–20 cmH2O. FiO2 was set to maintain SpO2 at around 95 %. After 24 h, weaning from NIV was considered according to hospital protocol [17]. Reintubation was also determined by attending physicians on the basis of the following indicators (one major criterion or at least two minor criteria). The major criteria were (1) respiratory arrest, (2) loss of consciousness, (3) heart rate <50 beats/minute with loss of alertness, (4) development of conditions necessitating intubation to protect the airway (coma or seizure disorders) or copious tracheal secretions requiring management, and (5) hemodynamic instability without response to fluids and vasoactive drugs. The minor criteria were (1) respiratory rate >35 breaths/minute, (2) pH <7.35 for hypoxemic patients and <7.30 for hypercapnic patients, (3) PaO2 < 60 mmHg at FiO2 > 0.5 or supplemental oxygen flow >10 L/minute, (4) persistent tachycardia, and (5) persistent activation of accessory respiratory muscles. We recorded whether the patient was reintubated within 72 h and within 7 days postextubation. We also recorded the duration of ICU stay, duration of hospital stay, duration of postextubation ICU stay, and duration of postextubation hospital stay when a patient was discharged from or died in the hospital. We followed the patient up to 90 days postextubation or death, whichever came first. SPSS version 17.0 software (SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA) was used to analyze the data. Mean and SD values were used to report normally distributed continuous variables. The difference in two groups was analyzed using an unpaired Student’s t test. Median and interquartile range values were used to report non-normally distributed continuous variables. The difference between two groups was analyzed with the Mann–Whitney U test. For grouped data, the chi-square and/or Fisher’s exact test was used. The cumulative 90-day survival probability was analyzed by creating Kaplan-Meier curves, and the difference between two groups was analyzed by log-rank test. p < 0.05 was considered to signify statistical significance.

Results

We enrolled 356 patients in this study between January 2011 and May 2016. The median value of cough peak flow was 70 L/minute. The proportions of patients who received NIV were 60 % (108 of 180 patients) among those with cough peak flow ≤70 L/minute and 40 % (71 of 176 patients) among those with cough peak flow >70 L/minute. The demographics of the patients are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1

Baseline values between groups

Cough peak flow ≤70 L/minuteCough peak flow >70 L/minute
NIV (n = 108)Control (n = 72) p Valuea NIV (n = 71)Control (n = 105) p Valuea p Valueb
Age, years73 ± 1274 ± 130.6867 ± 1458 ± 19<0.01c <0.01c
Females/males, n 32/7633/390.04c 12/5927/780.20<0.01c
Reason for intubation
 AECOPD7431<0.01c 4626<0.01c <0.01c
 Pneumonia26320.01c 13360.03c 0.42
 ARDS250.129220.23<0.01c
 Asthma200.52150.400.17
 Other440.722160.01c 0.04c
APACHE II score
 Upon admission24 ± 623 ± 60.4621 ± 619 ± 70.02c <0.01c
 At extubation13 ± 313 ± 30.6512 ± 311 ± 30.02c <0.01c
Intubation period before extubation, days8 ± 127 ± 50.447 ± 55 ± 4<0.01c 0.01c
Cough peak flow, L/minute48 ± 1444 ± 150.0798 ± 34108 ± 290.04c <0.01c
Hemoglobin, g/dl10.8 ± 2.310.4 ± 2.20.2611.3 ± 2.511.3 ± 2.40.970.01c
Secretions, ml/24 h75 ± 4585 ± 540.1872 ± 4977 ± 730.610.56
Suction frequency/24 h11 ± 413 ± 4<0.01c 12 ± 412 ± 40.710.96
GCS score14.7 ± 1.214.2 ± 1.80.0614.9 ± 0.114.9 ± 0.10.80<0.01c
Physiological parameters at extubation
 pH7.42 ± 0.057.43 ± 0.050.307.45 ± 0.057.46 ± 0.050.25<0.01c
 PaCO2, mmHg51 ± 1345 ± 13<0.01c 48 ± 1139 ± 10<0.01c <0.01c
 PaO2/FiO2 222 ± 63269 ± 86<0.01c 225 ± 55265 ± 94<0.01c 0.33
 Respiratory rate, breaths/minute23 ± 523 ± 50.6523 ± 622 ± 50.090.44
 Rapid shallow breathing index60 ± 2766 ± 240.1255 ± 2148 ± 230.06<0.01c
 Heart rate, beats/minute99 ± 1693 ± 160.02c 100 ± 1794 ± 150.01c 0.96
 Mean arterial pressure, mmHg93 ± 1390 ± 120.1894 ± 1293 ± 120.530.40

Abbreviations: APACHE II Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, NIV Noninvasive ventilation, AECOPD Acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, ARDS Acute respiratory distress syndrome, GCS Glasgow Coma Scale, PaCO Partial pressure of carbon dioxide in arterial blood, PaO /FiO Ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen

aDifference in NIV versus control

bDifference in weak versus strong cough

c p < 0.05

Baseline values between groups Abbreviations: APACHE II Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, NIV Noninvasive ventilation, AECOPD Acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, ARDS Acute respiratory distress syndrome, GCS Glasgow Coma Scale, PaCO Partial pressure of carbon dioxide in arterial blood, PaO /FiO Ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen aDifference in NIV versus control bDifference in weak versus strong cough c p < 0.05 In patients with cough peak flow ≤70 L/minute, NIV reduced reintubation at 72 h postextubation (10 of 108 [9 %] vs. 25 of 72 [35 %], p < 0.01) and 7 days postextubation (26 of 108 [24 %] vs. 35 of 72 [49 %], p < 0.01) compared with the control group (Table 2). It also reduced postextubation 90-day mortality (46 of 108 [43 %] vs. 44 of 72 [61 %], p = 0.02). In addition, NIV was a protective factor for reintubation at 72 h and 7 days postextubation (OR = 0.19, p < 0.01; OR = 0.33, p < 0.01) (Table 3). It also was a protective factor for death at 90 days postextubation (OR = 0.40, p = 0.02). Furthermore, patients in the NIV group had higher survival within 90 days postextubation (p = 0.03 by log-rank test) (Fig. 1).
Table 2

Outcomes between groups

Cough peak flow ≤70 L/minuteCough peak flow >70 L/minute
NIV (n = 108)Control (n = 72) p Valuea NIV (n = 71)Control (n = 105) p Valuea p Valueb
Duration of ICU stay, days13 (10–20)15 (9–26)0.3412 (8–18)9 (5–12)<0.01c <0.01c
Duration of hospital stay, days23 (14–37)26 (15–48)0.1619 (12–28)17 (12–26)0.40<0.01c
Duration of postextubation ICU stay, days6 (4–11)7 (3–18)0.525 (3–9)3 (1–6)<0.01c <0.01c
Duration of postextubation hospital stay, days13 (7–23)14 (6–26)0.7810 (7–17)10 (6–16)0.54<0.01c
Reintubation at 72 h postextubation10 (9 %)25 (35 %)<0.01c 4 (6 %)6 (6 %)>0.99<0.01c
Reintubation at 7 days postextubation26 (24 %)35 (49 %)<0.01c 6 (9 %)9 (9 %)>0.99<0.01c
Hospital mortality36 (33 %)33 (46 %)0.128 (11 %)14 (13 %)0.82<0.01c
Postextubation 90-day mortality46 (43 %)44 (61 %)0.02c 15 (21 %)16 (15 %)0.32<0.01c

ICU Intensive care unit, NIV Noninvasive ventilation

aDifference between NIV and control

bDifference between weak and strong cough

c p < 0.05

Table 3

Multivariable analysis to identify independent risk factors for reintubation at 72 h and 7 days postextubation, and for death at 90 days postextubation

Cough peak flow ≤70 L/minuteCough peak flow >70 L/minute
OR (95 % CI) p ValueOR (95 % CI) p Value
Reintubation at 72 h postextubation
 Use of NIV0.19 (0.09–0.43)<0.01N/A
 APACHE II score at extubationN/A1.34 (1.10–1.63)<0.01
Reintubation at 7 days postextubation
 Use of NIV0.33 (0.16–0.66)<0.01N/A
 Intubation period before extubation, days1.07 (1.01–1.13)0.02N/A
 Hemoglobin, g/dl0.98 (0.96–0.99)0.010.96 (0.94–0.99)0.01
 Cough peak flow, L/minute0.97 (0.95–1.00)0.04N/A
 APACHE II score at extubationN/A1.30 (1.08–1.56)<0.01
Death at 90 days postextubation
 Use of NIV0.40 (0.19–0.85)0.02N/A
 Hemoglobin, g/dl0.97 (0.95–0.99)<0.010.97 (0.95–0.99)<0.01
 Cough peak flow, L/minute0.96 (0.94–0.99)<0.01N/A
 APACHE II score at extubation1.18 (1.04–1.33)0.011.37 (1.17–1.60)<0.01

Abbreviations: NIV Noninvasive ventilation, APACHE II Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, N/A Not applicable

We entered age, sex, APACHE II score, intubation period, cough peak flow, hemoglobin, secretions, suction frequency, Glasgow Coma Scale score, heart rate, respiratory rate, rapid shallow breathing index, arterial blood gas tests, and use of NIV into multivariable analysis to identify independent risk factors for reintubation at 72 h and 7 days postextubation, and for death at 90 days postextubation

Fig. 1

Cumulative 90-day survival in patients with cough peak flow ≤70 L/minute. NIV Noninvasive ventilation

Outcomes between groups ICU Intensive care unit, NIV Noninvasive ventilation aDifference between NIV and control bDifference between weak and strong cough c p < 0.05 Multivariable analysis to identify independent risk factors for reintubation at 72 h and 7 days postextubation, and for death at 90 days postextubation Abbreviations: NIV Noninvasive ventilation, APACHE II Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, N/A Not applicable We entered age, sex, APACHE II score, intubation period, cough peak flow, hemoglobin, secretions, suction frequency, Glasgow Coma Scale score, heart rate, respiratory rate, rapid shallow breathing index, arterial blood gas tests, and use of NIV into multivariable analysis to identify independent risk factors for reintubation at 72 h and 7 days postextubation, and for death at 90 days postextubation Cumulative 90-day survival in patients with cough peak flow ≤70 L/minute. NIV Noninvasive ventilation In patients with cough peak flow >70 L/minute, NIV did not reduce reintubation (at 72 h postextubation: 4 of 71 [6 %] vs. 6 of 105 [6 %], p > 0.99; 7 days postextubation: 6 of 71 [9 %] vs. 9 of 105 [9 %], p > 0.99) or postextubation 90-day mortality (15 of 71 [21 %] vs. 16 of 105 [15 %], p = 0.32) compared with the control group (Table 2), nor was NIV associated with reintubation or postextubation 90-day mortality (Table 3). In addition, survival rates within 90 days postextubation were similar between the two groups (p = 0.32 by log-rank test) (Fig. 2).
Fig. 2

Cumulative 90-day survival in patients with cough peak flow >70 L/minute. NIV Noninvasive ventilation

Cumulative 90-day survival in patients with cough peak flow >70 L/minute. NIV Noninvasive ventilation The subgroup analysis of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is summarized in Table 4. Prophylactic NIV was a protective factor for reintubation at 72 h postextubation (OR = 0.11, p < 0.01) and 7 days postextubation (OR = 0.27, p = 0.01) in patients with cough peak flow ≤70 L/minute. It was also a protective factor for death at postextubation 90 days in patients with weak cough (OR = 0.27, p = 0.01). However, prophylactic NIV was not associated with reintubation or postextubation 90-day mortality in patients with cough peak flow >70 L/minute.
Table 4

Multivariable analysis to identify independent risk factors for reintubation at 72 h and 7 days postextubation, and for death at 90 days postextubation, in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Cough peak flow ≤ 70 L/minuteCough peak flow > 70 L/minute
OR (95 % CI) p ValueOR (95 % CI) p Value
Reintubation at 72 h postextubation
 Use of NIV0.11 (0.03–0.38)<0.01N/A
 Intubation period before extubation, days1.10 (1.01–1.09)0.03N/A
Reintubation at 7 days postextubation
 Use of NIV0.27 (0.10–0.77)0.01N/A
 Cough peak flow, L/minute0.95 (0.92–0.98)<0.01N/A
Death at 90 days postextubation
 Use of NIV0.27 (0.10–0.74)0.01N/A
 Hemoglobin, g/dl0.98 (0.95–1.00)0.020.97 (0.93–1.00)0.05
 Cough peak flow, L/minute0.97 (0.94–1.00)0.03N/A
 APACHE II score at extubation1.21 (1.01–1.46)0.041.46 (1.03–2.07)0.04

NIV Noninvasive ventilation, APACHE II Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, N/A Not applicable

We entered age, sex, APACHE II score, intubation periods, cough peak flow, hemoglobin, secretions, suction frequency, Glasgow Coma Scale score, heart rate, respiratory rate, rapid shallow breathing index, arterial blood gas tests, and use of NIV into multivariable analysis to identify independent risk factors for reintubation at 72 h and 7 days postextubation, and for death at 90 days postextubation

Multivariable analysis to identify independent risk factors for reintubation at 72 h and 7 days postextubation, and for death at 90 days postextubation, in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease NIV Noninvasive ventilation, APACHE II Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, N/A Not applicable We entered age, sex, APACHE II score, intubation periods, cough peak flow, hemoglobin, secretions, suction frequency, Glasgow Coma Scale score, heart rate, respiratory rate, rapid shallow breathing index, arterial blood gas tests, and use of NIV into multivariable analysis to identify independent risk factors for reintubation at 72 h and 7 days postextubation, and for death at 90 days postextubation

Discussion

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to report the efficacy of NIV in preventing reintubation in patients with weak cough strength (<70 L/minute). It also shows that when cough strength was >70 L/minute, reintubation was rare and NIV was not needed. Respiratory muscle function is associated with ventilator weaning. Patients with greater respiratory muscle strength are more likely to wean from mechanical ventilation [18, 19], and respiratory muscle strength is positively correlated with cough peak flow [7]. Therefore, cough peak flow can serve as a predictor for successful weaning from mechanical ventilation. Several studies have reported that patients with lower cough peak flow had higher probability of reintubation [1-6]. However, how to reduce or avoid reintubation in this population is still unclear. NIV reduces the work of breathing in patients with acute respiratory failure [20]. Given the advantages of NIV, it has been widely used in postextubation periods [10–13, 21, 22]. However, NIV benefited neither the entire population nor an unselected COPD population when it was used immediately after extubation [21, 22], but immediate use of NIV after extubation benefited patients at high risk for reintubation [10-13]. In our present study, we demonstrate that prophylactic NIV benefited patients with weak cough, including the COPD population, but that it did not benefit patients with strong cough with or without COPD. The results of this study may help practitioners to improve postextubation management. To our knowledge, only one other study to date has been aimed at demonstrating the efficacy of prophylactic NIV in a high-risk population that included patients with weak cough [13]. In that study, the authors enrolled only five patients with weak cough. With such a small sample size, they failed to demonstrate the efficacy of prophylactic NIV in patients with weak cough. Further, they assessed the cough strength using Airway Care Score (a semiquantitative scale that includes six dimensions). However, cough peak flow is objective and has been widely used in cough strength assessment [1-6]. So, we selected a more objective and widely accepted measure to assess cough strength, which may be much easier to use in guiding clinical practitioners to manage ventilator weaning. In patients with cough peak flow >70 L/minute, prophylactic NIV did not reduce reintubation or postextubation 90-day mortality. It indicated that patients with strong cough possibly received no benefit from prophylactic NIV. However, use of a high-flow nasal cannula benefited low-risk patients when it was used immediately after planned extubation [23]. Further, compared with NIV, it also showed benefits in patients with acute respiratory failure [24]. Thus, a high-flow nasal cannula was a good choice for postextubation management in patients with strong cough. Our study may be limited by the methodology we used. It was an observational study, and the attending physicians determined whether the patients received NIV or conventional oxygen treatment. Patients with more serious illness were more likely to receive NIV. This led to unequal demographics between the NIV and control groups. However, we used multivariable logistic regression analysis and found that NIV was a protective factor for reintubation and for death at 90 days postextubation in patients with weak cough. Although a cohort study has less evidentiary strength than a randomized controlled study, our study with a large sample size shows the efficacy of prophylactic NIV in patients with weak cough strength.

Conclusions

The median value of cough peak flow was 70 L/minute in a large planned extubation population. Prophylactic NIV benefited patients with weak cough with or without COPD, but not in patients with strong cough.

Key messages

The median value of cough peak flow in the planned extubated population was 70 L/minute. Immediate use of NIV after extubation reduced reintubation and postextubation 90-day mortality in patients with weak cough. However, prophylactic NIV may not have benefited patients with strong cough.
  24 in total

1.  Protocol-directed versus physician-directed weaning from noninvasive ventilation: the impact in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients.

Authors:  Jun Duan; Xiaokui Tang; Shicong Huang; Jinwei Jia; Shuliang Guo
Journal:  J Trauma Acute Care Surg       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 3.313

2.  Preventive use of noninvasive ventilation after extubation: a prospective, multicenter randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Chien-Ling Su; Ling-Ling Chiang; Shih-Hsing Yang; Hen-I Lin; Kuo-Chen Cheng; Yuh-Chin T Huang; Chin-Pyng Wu
Journal:  Respir Care       Date:  2011-07-12       Impact factor: 2.258

3.  High-flow oxygen through nasal cannula in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.

Authors:  Jean-Pierre Frat; Arnaud W Thille; Alain Mercat; Christophe Girault; Stéphanie Ragot; Sébastien Perbet; Gwénael Prat; Thierry Boulain; Elise Morawiec; Alice Cottereau; Jérôme Devaquet; Saad Nseir; Keyvan Razazi; Jean-Paul Mira; Laurent Argaud; Jean-Charles Chakarian; Jean-Damien Ricard; Xavier Wittebole; Stéphanie Chevalier; Alexandre Herbland; Muriel Fartoukh; Jean-Michel Constantin; Jean-Marie Tonnelier; Marc Pierrot; Armelle Mathonnet; Gaëtan Béduneau; Céline Delétage-Métreau; Jean-Christophe M Richard; Laurent Brochard; René Robert
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2015-05-17       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Weaning from mechanical ventilation.

Authors:  J-M Boles; J Bion; A Connors; M Herridge; B Marsh; C Melot; R Pearl; H Silverman; M Stanchina; A Vieillard-Baron; T Welte
Journal:  Eur Respir J       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 16.671

5.  Effect of Postextubation High-Flow Nasal Cannula vs Conventional Oxygen Therapy on Reintubation in Low-Risk Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Gonzalo Hernández; Concepción Vaquero; Paloma González; Carles Subira; Fernando Frutos-Vivar; Gemma Rialp; Cesar Laborda; Laura Colinas; Rafael Cuena; Rafael Fernández
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2016-04-05       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Predictors of successful weaning from prolonged mechanical ventilation in Taiwan.

Authors:  Yao-Kuang Wu; Kuo-Chin Kao; Kuang-Hung Hsu; Meng-Jer Hsieh; Ying-Huang Tsai
Journal:  Respir Med       Date:  2009-04-09       Impact factor: 3.415

7.  Cough peak flows and extubation outcomes.

Authors:  Mihai Smina; Adil Salam; Mohammad Khamiees; Pritee Gada; Yaw Amoateng-Adjepong; Constantine A Manthous
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 9.410

8.  Non-invasive ventilation after extubation in hypercapnic patients with chronic respiratory disorders: randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Miquel Ferrer; Jacobo Sellarés; Mauricio Valencia; Andres Carrillo; Gumersindo Gonzalez; Joan Ramon Badia; Josep Maria Nicolas; Antoni Torres
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2009-08-12       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Interest of an objective evaluation of cough during weaning from mechanical ventilation.

Authors:  Pascal Beuret; Christophe Roux; Annie Auclair; Karim Nourdine; Mahmoud Kaaki; Marie-Jose Carton
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2009-01-24       Impact factor: 17.440

10.  Easily identified at-risk patients for extubation failure may benefit from noninvasive ventilation: a prospective before-after study.

Authors:  Arnaud W Thille; Florence Boissier; Hassen Ben-Ghezala; Keyvan Razazi; Armand Mekontso-Dessap; Christian Brun-Buisson; Laurent Brochard
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2016-02-26       Impact factor: 9.097

View more
  11 in total

1.  Cough peak flow to predict the extubation outcome: Comparison between three cough stimulation methods.

Authors:  Christiane Melo Almeida; Agnaldo José Lopes; Fernando Silva Guimarães
Journal:  Can J Respir Ther       Date:  2020-11-20

Review 2.  Global Physiology and Pathophysiology of Cough: Part 2. Demographic and Clinical Considerations: CHEST Expert Panel Report.

Authors:  Lorcan McGarvey; Bruce K Rubin; Satoru Ebihara; Karen Hegland; Alycia Rivet; Richard S Irwin; Donald C Bolser; Anne B Chang; Peter G Gibson; Stuart B Mazzone
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2021-04-24       Impact factor: 10.262

3.  Coughing correlates: insights into an innovative study using cough peak expiratory flow to predict extubation failure.

Authors:  Chuan Jiang; Antonio M Esquinas; Bushra Mina
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2016-12-06       Impact factor: 9.097

Review 4.  The role of non-invasive ventilation used immediately after planned extubation for adults with chronic respiratory disorders.

Authors:  Jinnan Ou; Huaying Chen; Lezhi Li; Liping Zhao; Na Nie
Journal:  Saudi Med J       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 1.484

Review 5.  Evaluation of cough peak expiratory flow as a predictor of successful mechanical ventilation discontinuation: a narrative review of the literature.

Authors:  Chuan Jiang; Antonio Esquinas; Bushra Mina
Journal:  J Intensive Care       Date:  2017-06-02

6.  Effects of manual hyperinflation, clinical practice versus expert recommendation, on displacement of mucus simulant: A laboratory study.

Authors:  Marcia S Volpe; Juliane M Naves; Gabriel G Ribeiro; Gualberto Ruas; Mauro R Tucci
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-02-12       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Role of ICU-acquired weakness on extubation outcome among patients at high risk of reintubation.

Authors:  Arnaud W Thille; Florence Boissier; Michel Muller; Albrice Levrat; Gaël Bourdin; Sylvène Rosselli; Jean-Pierre Frat; Rémi Coudroy; Emmanuel Vivier
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2020-03-12       Impact factor: 9.097

8.  Predictive power of extubation failure diagnosed by cough strength: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jun Duan; Xiaofang Zhang; Jianping Song
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2021-10-12       Impact factor: 9.097

9.  Not All COPD Patients Benefit from Prophylactic Noninvasive Ventilation After Scheduled Extubation: An Exploratory Study.

Authors:  Yan Gong; Xiaoli Han; Jun Duan; Shicong Huang
Journal:  Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis       Date:  2019-12-05

10.  Cough peak flow to predict extubation outcome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Natália de Araújo Ferreira; Arthur de Sá Ferreira; Fernando Silva Guimarães
Journal:  Rev Bras Ter Intensiva       Date:  2021 Jul-Sep
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.