Oxygen Therapy in the ICU

To the Editor: Mackle et al. (March 12 issue) 1 report that ICU-ROX (Intensive Care Unit Randomized Trial Comparing Two Approaches to Oxygen Therapy) showed that in patients undergoing mechanical ventilation, there was no significant difference in ventilator-free days between those who received cons...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The New England journal of medicine 2020-06, Vol.382 (26), p.2577-2579
Hauptverfasser: Albert, Tyler J, Swenson, Erik R, Cheung, Jonathan C.H, Lam, Philip K.N, Das, Saurabh K, Choupoo, Nang S, Ray, Sumit, Young, Paul, Mackle, Diane, Bellomo, Rinaldo, Capellier, Gilles, Barrot, Loic, Puyraveau, Marc, Angus, Derek C
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:To the Editor: Mackle et al. (March 12 issue) 1 report that ICU-ROX (Intensive Care Unit Randomized Trial Comparing Two Approaches to Oxygen Therapy) showed that in patients undergoing mechanical ventilation, there was no significant difference in ventilator-free days between those who received conservative oxygen supplementation to avoid systemic hyperoxemia and those who received usual oxygen therapy. Although patients who had received invasive mechanical ventilation or noninvasive ventilation for 2 hours or more before enrollment were excluded, there was no mention or documentation of the fraction of inspired oxygen (F i o 2 ) received before the trial interventions. This may be a considerable omission . . .
ISSN:0028-4793
1533-4406
DOI:10.1056/NEJMc2009489