Dataset Information

Prophylactic endotracheal intubation in critically ill patients with upper gastrointestinal bleed: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Background and Aim:Prophylactic endotracheal intubation for airway protection prior to endoscopy for the management of severe upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis is to examine the clinical outcomes and costs related to prophylactic endotracheal intubation compared to no intubation in UGIB. Methods:EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were used to identify studies through June 2017. Data regarding mortality, total hospital and intensive care unit length of stay (LOS), pneumonia, and cardiovascular events were collected. The DerSimonian-Laird random effects models were used to calculate the inverse variance-based weighted, pooled treatment effect across studies. Results:Seven studies (five manuscripts and two abstracts) were identified (5662 total patients). Prophylactic intubation conferred an increased risk of death (odds ratio [OR], 2.59, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-6.64), hospital LOS (mean difference, 0.96?days, 95% CI: 0.26-1.67), and pneumonia (OR 6.58, 95% CI: 4.91-8.81]) compared to endoscopy without intubation. The LOS-related cost was greater when prophylactic intubation was performed ($9020 per patient, 95% CI: $6962-10 609) compared to when it was not performed ($7510 per patient, 95% CI: $6486-8432). There was no difference in risk of cardiovascular events after sensitivity analysis. Conclusion:Prophylactic intubation in severe UGIB is associated with a greater risk of pneumonia, LOS, death, and cost compared to endoscopy without intubation. Randomized trials examining this issue are warranted.

SUBMITTER: Chaudhuri D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7008165 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Prophylactic endotracheal intubation in critically ill patients with upper gastrointestinal bleed: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Chaudhuri Dipayan D Bishay Kirles K Tandon Parul P Trivedi Vatsal V James Paul D PD Kelly Erin M EM Thavorn Kednapa K Kyeremanteng Kwadwo K

JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology 20190524 1

<h4>Background and aim</h4>Prophylactic endotracheal intubation for airway protection prior to endoscopy for the management of severe upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis is to examine the clinical outcomes and costs related to prophylactic endotracheal intubation compared to no intubation in UGIB.<h4>Methods</h4>EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were used to identify studies through June 2017. Data regarding ...[more]

PMID: 32055693

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background:Patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) often require urgent or emergent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and are at risk of complications such as aspiration of gastric content or blood. The role of prophylactic endotracheal intubation (PEI) in the absence of usual respiratory status-related indications is not well established. Methods:We searched Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library's Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and SCOPUS from inception through July 2017 without date or language of publication restriction. We included studies that compared PEI with usual care (UC) in patients with acute UGIB, and reported any of the following outcomes: aspiration, pneumonia, mortality and length of stay. We excluded studies in which majority of included patients required intubation due to respiratory failure or decreased level of consciousness. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess the quality of evidence for each outcome. Results:We did not identify any randomized trials on this topic. We included 10 observational studies (n = 6068). We were not able to perform any adjusted analyses. PEI was associated with a significant increase in aspiration (OR 3.85, 95% CI, 1.46, 10.25; P = 0.01; I2 = 56%; low-quality evidence), pneumonia (OR 4.17, 95% CI, 1.82, 9.57; P = 0.0007; I2 =52%; low-quality evidence) and hospital length of stay (mean difference 0.86 days, 95% CI 0.13, 1.59; P = 0.02; I2 = 0; low-quality evidence), without clear effect on mortality (OR 1.92, 95% CI, 0.71, 5.23; P = 0.2; I2 = 95%; very low-quality evidence). Conclusions:Low- to very low-quality evidence from observational studies suggests that PEI in the setting of UGIB may be associated with higher rates of respiratory complications and, less likely, with increased mortality. Although the results are alarming, the lack of higher quality evidence calls for randomized trials to inform practice.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Endotracheal intubation can occur in up to 60% of critically ill patients. Despite the frequency with which endotracheal intubation occurs, the current practice is largely unknown. This is relevant, as advances in airway equipment (ie, video laryngoscopes) have become more prevalent, leading to possible improvement of care delivered during this process. In addition to new devices, a greater emphasis on airway plans and choices in sedation have evolved, although the influence on patient morbidity and mortality is largely unknown. OBJECTIVE:This study aims to derive and validate prediction models for immediate airway and hemodynamic complications of intensive care unit intubations. METHODS:A multicenter, observational, prospective study of adult critically ill patients admitted to both medical and surgical intensive care units (ICUs) was conducted. Participating ICU sites were located throughout eight health and human services regions of the United States for which endotracheal intubation was needed. A steering committee composed of both anesthesia and pulmonary critical care physicians proposed a core set of data variables. These variables were incorporated into a data collection form to be used within the multiple, participating ICUs across the United States during the time of intubation. The data collection form consisted of two basic components, focusing on airway management and hemodynamic management. The form was generated using RedCap and distributed to the participating centers. Quality checks on the dataset were performed several times with each center, such that they arrived at less than 10% missing values for each data variable; the checks were subsequently entered into a database. RESULTS:The study is currently undergoing data analysis. Results are expected in November 2018 with publication to follow thereafter. The study protocol has not yet undergone peer review by a funding body. CONCLUSIONS:The overall goal of this multicenter prospective study is to develop a scoring system for peri-intubation, hemodynamic, and airway-related complications so we can stratify those patients at greatest risk for decompensation as a result of these complications. This will allow critical care physicians to be better prepared in addressing these occurrences and will allow them to improve the quality of care delivered to the critically ill. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02508948; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02508948 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/73Oj6cTFu). INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID):RR1-10.2196/11101.

Project description:Laryngeal injury from intubation can substantially impact airway, voice, and swallowing, thus necessitating multidisciplinary interventions. The goals of this systematic review were (1) to review the types of laryngeal injuries and their patient-reported symptoms and clinical signs resulting from endotracheal intubation in patients intubated for surgeries and (2) to better understand the overall the frequency at which these injuries occur. We conducted a search of 4 online bibliographic databases (ie, PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature [CINAHL], and The Cochrane Library) and ProQuest and Open Access Thesis Dissertations (OPTD) from database inception to September 2019 without restrictions for language. Studies that completed postextubation laryngeal examinations with visualization in adult patients who were endotracheally intubated for surgeries were included. We excluded (1) retrospective studies, (2) case studies, (3) preexisting laryngeal injury/disease, (4) patients with histories of or surgical interventions that risk injury to the recurrent laryngeal nerve, (5) conference abstracts, and (6) patient populations with nonfocal, neurological impairments that may impact voice and swallowing function, thus making it difficult to identify isolated postextubation laryngeal injury. Independent, double-data extraction, and risk of bias assessment followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and the Cochrane Collaboration's criteria. Twenty-one articles (1 cross-sectional, 3 cohort, 5 case series, 12 randomized controlled trials) representing 21 surgical studies containing 6140 patients met eligibility criteria. The mean patient age across studies reporting age was 49 (95% confidence interval [CI], 45-53) years with a mean intubation duration of 132 (95% CI, 106-159) minutes. Studies reported no injuries in 80% (95% CI, 69-88) of patients. All 21 studies presented on type of injury. Edema was the most frequently reported mild injury, with a prevalence of 9%-84%. Vocal fold hematomas were the most frequently reported moderate injury, with a prevalence of 4% (95% CI, 2-10). Severe injuries that include subluxation of the arytenoids and vocal fold paralysis are rare (<1%) outcomes. The most prevalent patient complaints postextubation were dysphagia (43%), pain (38%), coughing (32%), a sore throat (27%), and hoarseness (27%). Overall, laryngeal injury from short-duration surgical intubation is common and is most often mild. No uniform guidelines for laryngeal assessment postextubation from surgery are available and hoarseness is neither a good indicator of laryngeal injury or dysphagia. Protocolized screening for dysphonia and dysphagia postextubation may lead to improved identification of injury and, therefore, improved patient outcomes and reduced health care utilization.

Project description:ImportanceMany patients who survive critical illness are left with laryngeal functional impairment from endotracheal intubation that permanently limits their recovery and quality of life. Although the risk for laryngeal injury increases with larger endotracheal tube sizes, there are no data delineating the association of smaller endotracheal tube sizes with survival or acute recovery from critical illness.ObjectiveTo determine if smaller endotracheal tubes are noninferior to larger endotracheal tubes with respect to critical illness outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsThis propensity score-matched retrospective cohort study included all adult patients who underwent endotracheal intubation in the emergency department or intensive care unit and received mechanical ventilation for at least 12 hours from June 2020 to November 2020 at a single tertiary referral academic medical center.ExposuresEndotracheal intubation.Main outcomes and measuresPropensity score-matched analyses were performed with respect to the primary end point of 30-day all-cause in-hospital survival as well as the secondary end points of duration of invasive mechanical ventilation, length of hospital stay, mean peak inspiratory pressure, 30-day readmission, need for reintubation, and need for tracheostomy or gastrostomy tube placement.ResultsOverall, 523 participants (64%) were men and 291 (36%) were women. Of these, 814 patients were categorized into 3 endotracheal tube groups: small for height (n = 182), appropriate for height (n = 408), and large for height (n = 224). There was not a significant difference in 30-day all-cause in-hospital survival between groups ([HR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.7-1.7] for small vs appropriate; [HR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.7-1.6] for large vs appropriate). Patients with small-for-height endotracheal tubes had longer intubation durations (mean difference, 32.5 hrs [95% CI, 6.4-58.6 hrs]) compared with patients with appropriate-for-height tubes.Conclusions and relevanceDespite differences in intubation duration, the results of this cohort study suggest that smaller endotracheal tube sizes are not associated with impaired survival or recovery from critical illness. They support future prospective exploration of the association of smaller endotracheal tube sizes with recovery from critical illness.

Dataset Information

Prophylactic endotracheal intubation in critically ill patients with upper gastrointestinal bleed: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Publications

Prophylactic endotracheal intubation in critically ill patients with upper gastrointestinal bleed: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets