Conservative versus Liberal Oxygenation Targets for Mechanically Ventilated Patients. A Pilot Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

There are no randomized controlled trials comparing different oxygenation targets for intensive care unit (ICU) patients. To determine whether a conservative oxygenation strategy is a feasible alternative to a liberal oxygenation strategy among ICU patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine 2016-01, Vol.193 (1), p.43-51
Hauptverfasser: Panwar, Rakshit, Hardie, Miranda, Bellomo, Rinaldo, Barrot, Loïc, Eastwood, Glenn M, Young, Paul J, Capellier, Gilles, Harrigan, Peter W J, Bailey, Michael
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:There are no randomized controlled trials comparing different oxygenation targets for intensive care unit (ICU) patients. To determine whether a conservative oxygenation strategy is a feasible alternative to a liberal oxygenation strategy among ICU patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). At four multidisciplinary ICUs, 103 adult patients deemed likely to require IMV for greater than or equal to 24 hours were randomly allocated to either a conservative oxygenation strategy with target oxygen saturation as measured by pulse oximetry (SpO2) of 88-92% (n = 52) or a liberal oxygenation strategy with target SpO2 of greater than or equal to 96% (n = 51). The mean area under the curve and 95% confidence interval (CI) for SpO2 (93.4% [92.9-93.9%] vs. 97% [96.5-97.5%]), SaO2 (93.5% [93.1-94%] vs. 96.8% [96.3-97.3%]), PaO2 (70 [68-73] mm Hg vs. 92 [89-96] mm Hg), and FiO2 (0.26 [0.25-0.28] vs. 0.36 [0.34-0.39) in the conservative versus liberal oxygenation arm were significantly different (P 
ISSN:1073-449X
1535-4970
DOI:10.1164/rccm.201505-1019OC