1
|
Klitgaard TL, Schjørring OL, Nielsen FM, Meyhoff CS, Perner A, Wetterslev J, Rasmussen BS, Barbateskovic M. Higher versus lower fractions of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to the intensive care unit. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2023; 9:CD012631. [PMID: 37700687 PMCID: PMC10498149 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd012631.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/14/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This is an updated review concerning 'Higher versus lower fractions of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to the intensive care unit'. Supplementary oxygen is provided to most patients in intensive care units (ICUs) to prevent global and organ hypoxia (inadequate oxygen levels). Oxygen has been administered liberally, resulting in high proportions of patients with hyperoxemia (exposure of tissues to abnormally high concentrations of oxygen). This has been associated with increased mortality and morbidity in some settings, but not in others. Thus far, only limited data have been available to inform clinical practice guidelines, and the optimum oxygenation target for ICU patients is uncertain. Because of the publication of new trial evidence, we have updated this review. OBJECTIVES To update the assessment of benefits and harms of higher versus lower fractions of inspired oxygen (FiO2) or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to the ICU. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, BIOSIS Previews, and LILACS. We searched for ongoing or unpublished trials in clinical trial registers and scanned the reference lists and citations of included trials. Literature searches for this updated review were conducted in November 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared higher versus lower FiO2 or targets of arterial oxygenation (partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), peripheral or arterial oxygen saturation (SpO2 or SaO2)) for adults admitted to the ICU. We included trials irrespective of publication type, publication status, and language. We excluded trials randomising participants to hypoxaemia (FiO2 below 0.21, SaO2/SpO2 below 80%, or PaO2 below 6 kPa) or to hyperbaric oxygen, and cross-over trials and quasi-randomised trials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Four review authors independently, and in pairs, screened the references identified in the literature searches and extracted the data. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, the proportion of participants with one or more serious adverse events (SAEs), and quality of life. We analysed all outcomes at maximum follow-up. Only three trials reported the proportion of participants with one or more SAEs as a composite outcome. However, most trials reported on events categorised as SAEs according to the International Conference on Harmonisation Good Clinical Practice (ICH-GCP) criteria. We, therefore, conducted two analyses of the effect of higher versus lower oxygenation strategies using 1) the single SAE with the highest reported proportion in each trial, and 2) the cumulated proportion of participants with an SAE in each trial. Two trials reported on quality of life. Secondary outcomes were lung injury, myocardial infarction, stroke, and sepsis. No trial reported on lung injury as a composite outcome, but four trials reported on the occurrence of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and five on pneumonia. We, therefore, conducted two analyses of the effect of higher versus lower oxygenation strategies using 1) the single lung injury event with the highest reported proportion in each trial, and 2) the cumulated proportion of participants with ARDS or pneumonia in each trial. We assessed the risk of systematic errors by evaluating the risk of bias in the included trials using the Risk of Bias 2 tool. We used the GRADEpro tool to assess the overall certainty of the evidence. We also evaluated the risk of publication bias for outcomes reported by 10b or more trials. MAIN RESULTS We included 19 RCTs (10,385 participants), of which 17 reported relevant outcomes for this review (10,248 participants). For all-cause mortality, 10 trials were judged to be at overall low risk of bias, and six at overall high risk of bias. For the reported SAEs, 10 trials were judged to be at overall low risk of bias, and seven at overall high risk of bias. Two trials reported on quality of life, of which one was judged to be at overall low risk of bias and one at high risk of bias for this outcome. Meta-analysis of all trials, regardless of risk of bias, indicated no significant difference from higher or lower oxygenation strategies at maximum follow-up with regard to mortality (risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (C)I 0.96 to 1.06; I2 = 14%; 16 trials; 9408 participants; very low-certainty evidence); occurrence of SAEs: the highest proportion of any specific SAE in each trial RR 1.01 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.06; I2 = 36%; 9466 participants; 17 trials; very low-certainty evidence), or quality of life (mean difference (MD) 0.5 points in participants assigned to higher oxygenation strategies (95% CI -2.75 to 1.75; I2 = 34%, 1649 participants; 2 trials; very low-certainty evidence)). Meta-analysis of the cumulated number of SAEs suggested benefit of a lower oxygenation strategy (RR 1.04 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.07; I2 = 74%; 9489 participants; 17 trials; very low certainty evidence)). However, trial sequential analyses, with correction for sparse data and repetitive testing, could reject a relative risk increase or reduction of 10% for mortality and the highest proportion of SAEs, and 20% for both the cumulated number of SAEs and quality of life. Given the very low-certainty of evidence, it is necessary to interpret these findings with caution. Meta-analysis of all trials indicated no statistically significant evidence of a difference between higher or lower oxygenation strategies on the occurrence of lung injuries at maximum follow-up (the highest reported proportion of lung injury RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.38; I2 = 0%; 2048 participants; 8 trials; very low-certainty evidence). Meta-analysis of all trials indicated harm from higher oxygenation strategies as compared with lower on the occurrence of sepsis at maximum follow-up (RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.93; I2 = 0%; 752 participants; 3 trials; very low-certainty evidence). Meta-analysis indicated no differences regarding the occurrences of myocardial infarction or stroke. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS In adult ICU patients, it is still not possible to draw clear conclusions about the effects of higher versus lower oxygenation strategies on all-cause mortality, SAEs, quality of life, lung injuries, myocardial infarction, stroke, and sepsis at maximum follow-up. This is due to low or very low-certainty evidence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas L Klitgaard
- Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
- Centre for Research in Intensive Care, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Olav L Schjørring
- Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
- Centre for Research in Intensive Care, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Frederik M Nielsen
- Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
- Centre for Research in Intensive Care, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Christian S Meyhoff
- Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Anders Perner
- Centre for Research in Intensive Care, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Department of Intensive Care, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Jørn Wetterslev
- Centre for Research in Intensive Care, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Private Office, Hellerup, Denmark
| | - Bodil S Rasmussen
- Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
- Centre for Research in Intensive Care, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Marija Barbateskovic
- Copenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Barbateskovic M, Schjørring OL, Russo Krauss S, Jakobsen JC, Meyhoff CS, Dahl RM, Rasmussen BS, Perner A, Wetterslev J. Higher versus lower fraction of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to the intensive care unit. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019; 2019. [PMID: 31773728 PMCID: PMC6880382 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd012631.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The mainstay treatment for hypoxaemia is oxygen therapy, which is given to the vast majority of adults admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). The practice of oxygen administration has been liberal, which may result in hyperoxaemia. Some studies have indicated an association between hyperoxaemia and mortality, whilst other studies have not. The ideal target for supplemental oxygen for adults admitted to the ICU is uncertain. Despite a lack of robust evidence of effectiveness, oxygen administration is widely recommended in international clinical practice guidelines. The potential benefit of supplemental oxygen must be weighed against the potentially harmful effects of hyperoxaemia. OBJECTIVES To assess the benefits and harms of higher versus lower fraction of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to the ICU. SEARCH METHODS We identified trials through electronic searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, BIOSIS Previews, CINAHL, and LILACS. We searched for ongoing or unpublished trials in clinical trials registers. We also scanned the reference lists of included studies. We ran the searches in December 2018. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared higher versus lower fraction of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to the ICU. We included trials irrespective of publication type, publication status, and language. We included trials with a difference between the intervention and control groups of a minimum 1 kPa in partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO2), minimum 10% in fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2), or minimum 2% in arterial oxygen saturation of haemoglobin/non-invasive peripheral oxygen saturation (SaO2/SpO2). We excluded trials randomizing participants to hypoxaemia (FiO2 below 0.21, SaO2/SpO2 below 80%, and PaO2 below 6 kPa) and to hyperbaric oxygen. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Three review authors independently, and in pairs, screened the references retrieved in the literature searches and extracted data. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, the proportion of participants with one or more serious adverse events, and quality of life. None of the trials reported the proportion of participants with one or more serious adverse events according to the International Conference on Harmonisation Good Clinical Practice (ICH-GCP) criteria. Nonetheless, most trials reported several serious adverse events. We therefore included an analysis of the effect of higher versus lower fraction of inspired oxygen, or targets using the highest reported proportion of participants with a serious adverse event in each trial. Our secondary outcomes were lung injury, acute myocardial infarction, stroke, and sepsis. None of the trials reported on lung injury as a composite outcome, however some trials reported on acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and pneumonia. We included an analysis of the effect of higher versus lower fraction of inspired oxygen or targets using the highest reported proportion of participants with ARDS or pneumonia in each trial. To assess the risk of systematic errors, we evaluated the risk of bias of the included trials. We used GRADE to assess the overall certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS We included 10 RCTs (1458 participants), seven of which reported relevant outcomes for this review (1285 participants). All included trials had an overall high risk of bias, whilst two trials had a low risk of bias for all domains except blinding of participants and personnel. Meta-analysis indicated harm from higher fraction of inspired oxygen or targets as compared with lower fraction or targets of arterial oxygenation regarding mortality at the time point closest to three months (risk ratio (RR) 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01 to 1.37; I2 = 0%; 4 trials; 1135 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Meta-analysis indicated harm from higher fraction of inspired oxygen or targets as compared with lower fraction or targets of arterial oxygenation regarding serious adverse events at the time point closest to three months (estimated highest proportion of specific serious adverse events in each trial RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.23; I2 = 0%; 1234 participants; 6 trials; very low-certainty evidence). These findings should be interpreted with caution given that they are based on very low-certainty evidence. None of the included trials reported any data on quality of life at any time point. Meta-analysis indicated no evidence of a difference between higher fraction of inspired oxygen or targets as compared with lower fraction or targets of arterial oxygenation on lung injury at the time point closest to three months (estimated highest reported proportion of lung injury RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.36; I2 = 0%; 1167 participants; 5 trials; very low-certainty evidence). None of the included trials reported any data on acute myocardial infarction or stroke, and only one trial reported data on the effects on sepsis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We are very uncertain about the effects of higher versus lower fraction of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to the ICU on all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, and lung injuries at the time point closest to three months due to very low-certainty evidence. Our results indicate that oxygen supplementation with higher versus lower fractions or oxygenation targets may increase mortality. None of the trials reported the proportion of participants with one or more serious adverse events according to the ICH-GCP criteria, however we found that the trials reported an increase in the number of serious adverse events with higher fractions or oxygenation targets. The effects on quality of life, acute myocardial infarction, stroke, and sepsis are unknown due to insufficient data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marija Barbateskovic
- Department 7812, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, Blegdamsvej 9, Copenhagen, Denmark, DK-2100
- Department 7831, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Centre for Research in Intensive Care, Blegdamsvej 9, Copenhagen, Denmark, DK-2100
| | - Olav L Schjørring
- Department 7831, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Centre for Research in Intensive Care, Blegdamsvej 9, Copenhagen, Denmark, DK-2100
- Aalborg University Hospital, Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Hobrovej 18-22, Aalborg, Denmark, 9000
| | - Sara Russo Krauss
- Copenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, Blegdamsvej 9, Copenhagen, 2100, Denmark, Ø
| | - Janus C Jakobsen
- Department 7831, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Centre for Research in Intensive Care, Blegdamsvej 9, Copenhagen, Denmark, DK-2100
- Copenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, Department 7812, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group, Blegdamsvej 9, Copenhagen, Sjælland, Denmark, DK-2100
- Holbaek Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Holbaek, Denmark, 4300
| | - Christian S Meyhoff
- Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Bispebjerg Bakke 23, Copenhagen, Denmark, DK-2400
| | - Rikke M Dahl
- Herlev Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Department of Anaesthesiology, Herlev Ringvej 75, Pavillon 10, I65F10, Herlev, Denmark, 2730
| | - Bodil S Rasmussen
- Department 7831, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Centre for Research in Intensive Care, Blegdamsvej 9, Copenhagen, Denmark, DK-2100
- Aalborg University Hospital, Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Hobrovej 18-22, Aalborg, Denmark, 9000
| | - Anders Perner
- Department 7831, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Centre for Research in Intensive Care, Blegdamsvej 9, Copenhagen, Denmark, DK-2100
| | - Jørn Wetterslev
- Department 7812, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, Blegdamsvej 9, Copenhagen, Denmark, DK-2100
- Department 7831, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Centre for Research in Intensive Care, Blegdamsvej 9, Copenhagen, Denmark, DK-2100
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Oh H, Seo W. A meta-analysis of the effects of various interventions in preventing endotracheal suction-induced hypoxemia. J Clin Nurs 2003; 12:912-24. [PMID: 14632984 DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2702.2003.00796.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to clarify the effects of interventions that were applied to prevent endotracheal suction-induced hypoxia by meta-analysis. To obtain a sample for this meta-analysis, a computerized search was performed through MEDLINE in addition to tracking down additional references cited in bibliographies of past reports. Finally thirty research reports were examined. In terms of the application time of oxygenation, insufflation and preoxygenation were the most prevalently used in the studies. Regarding the methods of oxygenation, the most prevalent technique for oxygenation was hyperoxygenation in combination with hyperinflation. Hyperoxygenation and hyperinflation were most frequently induced by FiO2 of 1 and a 150% tidal volume of three to six breaths, respectively. Suctioning was commonly sustained for <15 seconds using pressures of -80 to -120 mmHg and with size 14 French catheters. Insufflation was less effective than the other methods examined in the present study. From this study, it can be concluded that the interventions that were applied to prevent endotracheal suction-induced hypoxia, regardless of their application times or methods, reduced suction-induced hypoxia significantly.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- HyunSoo Oh
- Department of Nursing, College of Medicine, Inha University, Incheon, Republic of Korea
| | | |
Collapse
|