Positive-end expiratory pressure reduces incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia in nonhypoxemic patients
- PMID: 18664777
- DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31817b8a92
Positive-end expiratory pressure reduces incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia in nonhypoxemic patients
Abstract
Objective: To analyze the effect on clinical outcomes of prophylactic positive end expiratory pressure in nonhypoxemic ventilated patients.
Design: Multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial.
Setting: One trauma and two general intensive care units in two university hospitals.
Patients: One hundred thirty-one mechanically ventilated patients with normal chest radiograph and PaO2/FiO2 above 250.
Interventions: Patients were randomly allocated to receive mechanical ventilation with 5-8 cm H2O of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) (PEEP group, n = 66) or no-PEEP (control group, n = 65).
Measurements and main results: Primary end-point variable was hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included microbiologically confirmed ventilator-associated pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, barotrauma, atelectasis, and hypoxemia (PaO2/FiO2 <175). Both groups were similar at randomization in demographic characteristics, intensive care unit admission diagnoses, severity of illness, and risk factors for ventilator-associated pneumonia. Hospital mortality rate was similar (p = 0.58) between PEEP (29.7%) and control (25.4%) groups. Ventilator-associated pneumonia was detected in 16 (25.4%) patients in the control group and 6 (9.4%) in the PEEP group (relative risk, 0.37; 95% confidence interval = 0.15-0.84; p = 0.017). The number of patients who developed hypoxemia was significantly higher in the control group (34 of 63 patients, 54%) than in the PEEP group (12 of 64, 19%) (p < 0.001), and the hypoxemia developed after a shorter period (median [interquartile range]) in the control group than in the PEEP group (38 [20-70] hrs vs. 77 [32-164] hrs, p < 0.001). Groups did not significantly differ in incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome (14% in controls vs. 5% in the PEEP group, p = 0.08), barotrauma (8% vs. 2%, respectively, p = 0.12), or atelectasis (27% vs. 19%, respectively, p = 0.26).
Conclusions: These findings indicate that application of prophylactic PEEP in nonhypoxemic ventilated patients reduces the number of hypoxemia episodes and the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia.
Comment in
-
Ventilator-associated pneumonia prevention: WHAP, positive end-expiratory pressure, or both?Crit Care Med. 2008 Aug;36(8):2441-2. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31817c0dc6. Crit Care Med. 2008. PMID: 18664791 No abstract available.
-
PEEP is protective against pulmonary microaspiration.Crit Care Med. 2009 Jan;37(1):380; author reply 381-2. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31819325cc. Crit Care Med. 2009. PMID: 19112322 No abstract available.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
