Sébastien Dupuis1,2, Dave Brindamour1, Stephanie Karzon3, Anne Julie Frenette1,2,4, Emmanuel Charbonney2,5,6, Marc M Perreault4,7, Patrick Bellemare5,6, Lisa Burry8,9, David R Williamson10,11,12. 1. Pharmacy Department, Hôpital du Sacré-Cœur-de-Montréal, 5400 Boul Gouin O, Montreal, QC, H4J 1C5, Canada. 2. Research Center, Hôpital du Sacré-Cœur-de-Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada. 3. Department of Pharmacology, Faculté de Médecine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada. 4. Faculté de Pharmacie, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada. 5. Department of Critical Care, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur-de-Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada. 6. Department of Medicine, Faculté de médecine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada. 7. Pharmacy Department, McGill University Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada. 8. Pharmacy Department, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada. 9. Leslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 10. Pharmacy Department, Hôpital du Sacré-Cœur-de-Montréal, 5400 Boul Gouin O, Montreal, QC, H4J 1C5, Canada. david.williamson@umontreal.ca. 11. Research Center, Hôpital du Sacré-Cœur-de-Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada. david.williamson@umontreal.ca. 12. Faculté de Pharmacie, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada. david.williamson@umontreal.ca.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Delirium, agitation, and anxiety may hinder weaning from mechanical ventilation and lead to increased morbidity and healthcare costs. The most appropriate clinical approach to weaning in these contexts remains unclear and challenging to clinicians. The objective of this systematic review was to identify effective and safe interventions to wean patients that are difficult-to-wean from mechanical ventilation due to delirium, agitation, or anxiety. METHODS: A systematic review was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed. Studies evaluating mechanically ventilated patients deemed difficult-to-wean due to delirium, agitation, or anxiety, and comparing the effects of an intervention with a comparator arm were sought. Time-to-extubation was the primary outcome while the secondary outcome was intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay. RESULTS: From 10,860 studies identified, eight met the inclusion criteria: six studies assessed dexmedetomidine while the remaining two assessed loxapine and biofeedback. Pooled analysis of studies assessing dexmedetomidine showed reduced time-to-extubation (six studies, n = 303) by 10.9 hr compared with controls (95% confidence interval [CI], -15.7 to -6.1; I2 = 68%) and ICU length of stay (four studies, n = 191) by 2.6 days (95% CI, 1.9 to 3.3; I2 = 0%). Nevertheless, the evidence was deemed to be of low quality given the small sample sizes and high heterogeneity. Studies assessing other interventions did not identify improvements compared with controls. Safety assessment was globally poorly reported. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis provides low quality evidence to suggest the use of dexmedetomidine in patients deemed difficult-to-wean due to agitation, delirium, or anxiety. Insufficient evidence was found regarding other interventions to provide any recommendation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42016042528); registered 15 July, 2016.
BACKGROUND: Delirium, agitation, and anxiety may hinder weaning from mechanical ventilation and lead to increased morbidity and healthcare costs. The most appropriate clinical approach to weaning in these contexts remains unclear and challenging to clinicians. The objective of this systematic review was to identify effective and safe interventions to wean patients that are difficult-to-wean from mechanical ventilation due to delirium, agitation, or anxiety. METHODS: A systematic review was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed. Studies evaluating mechanically ventilated patients deemed difficult-to-wean due to delirium, agitation, or anxiety, and comparing the effects of an intervention with a comparator arm were sought. Time-to-extubation was the primary outcome while the secondary outcome was intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay. RESULTS: From 10,860 studies identified, eight met the inclusion criteria: six studies assessed dexmedetomidine while the remaining two assessed loxapine and biofeedback. Pooled analysis of studies assessing dexmedetomidine showed reduced time-to-extubation (six studies, n = 303) by 10.9 hr compared with controls (95% confidence interval [CI], -15.7 to -6.1; I2 = 68%) and ICU length of stay (four studies, n = 191) by 2.6 days (95% CI, 1.9 to 3.3; I2 = 0%). Nevertheless, the evidence was deemed to be of low quality given the small sample sizes and high heterogeneity. Studies assessing other interventions did not identify improvements compared with controls. Safety assessment was globally poorly reported. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis provides low quality evidence to suggest the use of dexmedetomidine in patients deemed difficult-to-wean due to agitation, delirium, or anxiety. Insufficient evidence was found regarding other interventions to provide any recommendation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42016042528); registered 15 July, 2016.
Authors: Andrés Esteban; Niall D Ferguson; Maureen O Meade; Fernando Frutos-Vivar; Carlos Apezteguia; Laurent Brochard; Konstantinos Raymondos; Nicolas Nin; Javier Hurtado; Vinko Tomicic; Marco González; José Elizalde; Peter Nightingale; Fekri Abroug; Paolo Pelosi; Yaseen Arabi; Rui Moreno; Manuel Jibaja; Gabriel D'Empaire; Fredi Sandi; Dimitros Matamis; Ana María Montañez; Antonio Anzueto Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2007-10-25 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: G-C Funk; S Anders; M-K Breyer; O C Burghuber; G Edelmann; W Heindl; G Hinterholzer; R Kohansal; R Schuster; A Schwarzmaier-D'Assie; A Valentin; S Hartl Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2009-06-18 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: Emily Damuth; Jessica A Mitchell; Jason L Bartock; Brian W Roberts; Stephen Trzeciak Journal: Lancet Respir Med Date: 2015-05-20 Impact factor: 30.700
Authors: Oscar Peñuelas; Fernando Frutos-Vivar; Cristina Fernández; Antonio Anzueto; Scott K Epstein; Carlos Apezteguía; Marco González; Nicholas Nin; Konstantinos Raymondos; Vinko Tomicic; Pablo Desmery; Yaseen Arabi; Paolo Pelosi; Michael Kuiper; Manuel Jibaja; Dimitros Matamis; Niall D Ferguson; Andrés Esteban Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2011-08-15 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Andrés Esteban; Antonio Anzueto; Fernando Frutos; Inmaculada Alía; Laurent Brochard; Thomas E Stewart; Salvador Benito; Scott K Epstein; Carlos Apezteguía; Peter Nightingale; Alejandro C Arroliga; Martin J Tobin Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-01-16 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Hannah Wunsch; Walter T Linde-Zwirble; Derek C Angus; Mary E Hartman; Eric B Milbrandt; Jeremy M Kahn Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 7.598
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
Authors: Fayez Alshamsi; Kallirroi Laiya Carayannopoulos; Anders Granholm; Joshua Piticaru; Kimberley Lewis; Zainab Al Duhailib; Dipayan Chaudhuri; Laura Spatafora; Yuhong Yuan; John Centofanti; Jessica Spence; Bram Rochwerg; Dan Perri; Dale M Needham; Anne Holbrook; John W Devlin; Osamu Nishida; Kimia Honarmand; Begüm Ergan; Eugenia Khorochkov; Pratik Pandharipande; Mohammed Alshahrani; Tim Karachi; Mark Soth; Yahya Shehabi; Morten Hylander Møller; Waleed Alhazzani Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2022-06-01 Impact factor: 41.787