Journal Article

Comparative effectiveness of alternative spontaneous breathing trial techniques: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials

Trivedi, Vatsal, Giammarioli, Benedetta, Ghadimi, Maryam, Burns, Karen E. A., Gomez Builes, Carolina, Desai, Kairavi, Friedrich, Jan O., Khan, Jeena, Lewis, Kimberley, Chaudhuri, Dipayan, Sadeghirad, Behnam, Phoophiboon, Vorakamol

2024

Overview

Background The spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) technique that best balance successful extubation with the risk for reintubation is unknown. We sought to determine the comparative efficacy and safety of alternative SBT techniques. Methods We searched Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to February 2023 for randomized or quasi-randomized trials comparing SBT techniques in critically ill adults and children and reported initial SBT success, successful extubation, reintubation (primary outcomes) and mortality (ICU, hospital, most protracted; secondary outcome) rates. Two reviewers screened, reviewed full-texts, and abstracted data. We performed frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis. Results We included 40 RCTs (6716 patients). Pressure Support (PS) versus T-piece SBTs was the most common comparison. Initial successful SBT rates were increased with PS [risk ratio (RR) 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.05–1.11)], PS/automatic tube compensation (ATC) [1.12 (1.01 –1.25), high flow nasal cannulae (HFNC) [1.07 (1.00–1.13) (all moderate certainty), and ATC [RR 1.11, (1.03–1.20); low certainty] SBTs compared to T-piece SBTs. Similarly, initial successful SBT rates were increased with PS, ATC, and PS/ATC SBTs compared to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) SBTs. Successful extubation rates were increased with PS [RR 1.06, (1.03–1.09); high certainty], ATC [RR 1.13, (1.05–1.21); moderate certainty], and HFNC [RR 1.06, (1.02–1.11); high certainty] SBTs, compared to T-piece SBTs. There was little to no difference in reintubation rates with PS (vs. T-piece) SBTs [RR 1.05, (0.91–1.21); low certainty], but increased reintubation rates with PS [RR 2.84, (1.61–5.03); moderate certainty] and ATC [RR 2.95 (1.57–5.56); moderate certainty] SBTs compared to HFNC SBTs. Conclusions SBTs conducted with pressure augmentation (PS, ATC, PS/ATC) versus without (T-piece, CPAP) increased initial successful SBT and successful extubation rates. Although SBTs conducted with PS or ATC versus HFNC increased reintubation rates, this was not the case for PS versus T-piece SBTs.

• Publisher: BioMed Central,BioMed Central Ltd,Springer Nature B.V
• Subject: Airway Extubation - methods / Airway Extubation - statistics & numerical data / Analysis / Bias / Clinical medicine / Continuous positive airway pressure / Critical Care Medicine / Emergency Medicine / Estimates / Extubation / Health aspects / Humans / Intensive / Intensive care / Medicine / Medicine & Public Health / Meta-analysis / Mortality / Ostomy / Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - methods / Review / Success / Ventilator Weaning - methods / Ventilator Weaning - standards / Ventilator Weaning - statistics & numerical data / Ventilators