Literature DB >> 29985232

Use of diaphragm pacing in the management of acute cervical spinal cord injury.

Andrew J Kerwin1, Brian K Yorkgitis, David J Ebler, Firas G Madbak, Albert T Hsu, Marie L Crandall.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cervical spinal cord injury (CSCI) is devastating. Respiratory failure, ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), sepsis, and death frequently occur. Case reports of diaphragm pacing system (DPS) have suggested earlier liberation from mechanical ventilation in acute CSCI patients. We hypothesized DPS implantation would decrease VAP and facilitate liberation from ventilation.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients with acute CSCI managed at a single Level 1 trauma center between January 2005 and May 2017. Routine demographics were collected. Patients underwent propensity matching based on age, injury severity score, ventilator days, hospital length of stay, and need for tracheostomy. Outcome measures included hospital length of stay, intensive care unit length of stay, ventilator days (vent days), incidence of VAP, and mortality. Bivariate and multivariate logistic and linear regression statistics were performed using STATA Version 10.
RESULTS: Between July 2011 and May 2017, all patients with acute CSCI were evaluated for DPS implantation. Forty patients who had laparoscopic DPS implantation (DPS) were matched to 61 who did not (NO DPS). Median time to liberation after DPS implantation was 7 days. Hospital length of stay and mortality were significantly lower on bivariate analysis in DPS patients. Diaphragm pacing system placement was not found to be associated with statistically significant differences in these outcomes on risk-adjusted multivariate models that included admission year.
CONCLUSIONS: Diaphragm pacing system implantation in patients with acute CSCI can be one part of a comprehensive critical care program to improve outcomes. However, the association of DPS with the marked improved mortality seen on bivariate analysis may be due solely to improvements in critical care throughout the study period. Further studies to define the benefits of DPS implantation are needed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, level IV.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29985232     DOI: 10.1097/TA.0000000000002023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Trauma Acute Care Surg        ISSN: 2163-0755            Impact factor:   3.313


  5 in total

1.  Early use of an implantable diaphragm pacing stimulator for a child with severe acute flaccid myelitis-a case report.

Authors:  Travis L Edmiston; Mathew J Elrick; Mark L Kovler; Eric B Jelin; Raymond P Onders; Cristina L Sadowsky
Journal:  Spinal Cord Ser Cases       Date:  2019-07-17

2.  Diaphragm pacing decreases hospital charges for patients with acute cervical spinal cord injury.

Authors:  Andrew J Kerwin; Yohan Diaz Zuniga; Brian K Yorkgitis; Jennifer Mull; Albert T Hsu; Firas G Madbak; David J Ebler; David J Skarupa; Joseph Shiber; Marie L Crandall
Journal:  Trauma Surg Acute Care Open       Date:  2020-12-21

3.  An observation of the clinical efficacy of combining Riluzole with mannitol and hyperbaric oxygen in treating acute spinal cord injury.

Authors:  Huan-Xia Li; Jing Cui; Jing-Shi Fan; Jian-Zhou Tong
Journal:  Pak J Med Sci       Date:  2021 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.088

4.  Observational study of early diaphragm pacing in cervical spinal cord injured patients to decrease mechanical ventilation during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Authors:  Raymond P Onders; MaryJo Elmo; Brian Young; Glen Tinkoff
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2022-09-07       Impact factor: 4.348

5.  Diaphragm Pacing in Patients with Spinal Cord Injury: A European Experience.

Authors:  Peter J Wijkstra; Hans van der Aa; H Sijbrand Hofker; Francesco Curto; Matteo Giacomini; Giuliana Stagni; Maria Asuncion Dura Agullo; Francesc Xavier Curià Casanoves; Jesús Benito-Penalva; Carlos Martinez-Barenys; Joan Vidal
Journal:  Respiration       Date:  2021-07-16       Impact factor: 3.580

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.