• Chien-Ling Su, Ling-Ling Chiang, Shih-Hsing Yang, Hen-I Lin, Kuo-Chen Cheng, Yuh-Chin T Huang, and Chin-Pyng Wu.
• School of Respiratory Therapy, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
• Resp Care. 2012 Feb 1;57(2):204-10.

BackgroundThe effectiveness of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) after extubation in preventing post-extubation respiratory failure is still controversial.MethodsWe conducted a prospective, multicenter randomized controlled study involving patients on mechanical ventilation for > 48 hours who tolerated a 2-hour spontaneous breathing trial and were subsequently extubated. The patients were randomized to NIV or standard medical therapy. Re-intubation rate within 72 hours was the primary outcome measure. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to determine predictors for extubation failure.ResultsWe randomized 406 patients to either NIV (no. = 202) or standard medical therapy (no. = 204). The 2 groups had similar baseline clinical characteristics. There were no differences in extubation failure (13.2% in control and 14.9% in NIV), intensive care unit or hospital mortality. Cardiac failure was a more common cause of extubation failure in control than in NIV. There was no difference in rapid shallow breathing index (RSBI) in extubation failure patients between control (80) and NIV (73). When using data from all patients, we found Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) scores (odds ratio [OR] 1.13, 95% CI 1.07-1.20, P < .001), maximal inspiratory pressure (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.00-1.08, P = .03), and RSBI (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.02-1.05, P < .001) to be predictors of extubation failure. Abundant secretions were the most common reason (35.1%) for extubation failure identified by attending physicians.ConclusionsPreventive use of NIV after extubation in patients who passed spontaneous breathing trial did not show benefits in decreasing extubation failure rate or the mortality rate.

25 keywords...

hide…