SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Ventilator Weaning”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

28 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

PubMed2026

Respiratory effects of recruitment maneuvers according to lung recruitability assessed by electrical impedance tomography in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Recruitment maneuvers (RM) can improve oxygenation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), but their physiological effects depend on lung recruitability. This secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluated oxygenation, respiratory mechanics, regional ventilation, and cardiorespiratory adverse events responses to a RM followed by electrical impedance tomography (EIT)-guided PEEP titration, using EIT to assess lung recruitability. In this study, fifty patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS underwent a stepwise RM followed by individualized PEEP titration guided by EIT. Lung recruitability was determined using the collapse index at PEEP 6 cmH₂O (CLPEEP6), defined as the proportion of collapsed lung at this PEEP level. Patients were classified into high- and low-recruitability groups based on median CLPEEP6 values. Oxygenation (PaO₂/FiO₂), static compliance (Cstat), driving pressure (Pdriv), regional ventilation distribution, and cardiorespiratory adverse events were compared before and after RM, during subsequent individualized EIT-guided PEEP titration. In patients with high recruitability (CLPEEP6 > 12.5), the PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio and Cstat increased significantly after RM (PaO₂/FiO₂: 100.8 ± 30.3 vs. 125.4 ± 38.3 mmHg, p < 0.05; Cstat: 21.5 ± 5.8 vs. 28.0 ± 7.0 mL/cmH₂O, p < 0.001), Pdriv decreased (19.1 ± 3.5 vs. 15.6 ± 3.2 cmH₂O, p < 0.001). EIT demonstrated a posterior redistribution of ventilation after RM. In contrast, patients with low recruitability (CLPEEP6 ≤ 12.5) showed no significant mechanical or oxygenation improvement and transient hypotension, arrhythmia, and desaturation appeared numerically more common in this group. No barotrauma or cardiac arrest occurred, and ICU mortality was similar between groups. A strategy combining a RM with subsequent individualized EIT-guided PEEP titration was associated with improved oxygenation and lung mechanics in patients with high lung recruitability, whereas patients with low recruitability showed limited physiological benefit, with cardiorespiratory adverse events appearing numerically more frequent. The EIT-derived CLPEEP6 index represents a feasible and clinically applicable https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06733168.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

High-Flow Nasal Oxygen and the Risk of Gastric Insufflation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Supplemented by Narrative Synthesis.

High-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) generates positive airway pressure, raising concerns about gastric insufflation and aspiration risk. Although most studies report minimal or no gastric distension, some suggest significant changes. This systematic review and meta-analysis applied the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework to evaluate the effect of HFNO on gastric insufflation and related markers across clinical settings. We searched Medline, Embase, Emcare, and CINAHL through August 2025 for studies reporting qualitative or quantitative markers of gastric insufflation during HFNO use, including comet-tail artifacts, antral cross-sectional area, and gastric volume. Eligible designs included randomized trials, observational and volunteer studies, and case reports. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, and certainty of evidence was rated with GRADE. Meta-analysis was performed for outcomes reported in two or more studies. Six randomized trials, five observational studies, two volunteer studies, one case series, and two case reports were included. Observational studies primarily assessed outcomes before and after HFNO intervention. Pooled analysis of four randomized controlled trials (RCTs; n = 375) showed HFNO significantly reduced gastric insufflation compared with face-mask ventilation during elective peri-intubation (risk ratios [RR] = 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19-0.52; P < .00001; I 2 = 0%), rated moderate-certainty. For antral cross-sectional area, pooled analysis of three RCTs (n = 318) found no significant difference between HFNO and face-mask ventilation (MD -0.33 cm 2 ; 95% CI, -0.72 to 0.05; P = .09; I 2 = 74%), rated moderate-certainty. Observational studies assessing pre- and post-HFNO changes showed no significant increase in antral cross-sectional area (MD 0.08 cm 2 ; 95% CI, -0.29 to 0.45; P = .67; I 2 = 0%) and no significant change in gastric liquid volume (MD -0.01 ml/kg; 95% CI, -0.07 to 0.06; P = .80; I 2 = 0%), both rated low certainty. Nonpooled data suggested possible increases in critically ill patients, but the evidence was of very low certainty. A single study assessing microaspiration found HFNO reduced gastroesophageal reflux and prevented microaspiration compared with face-mask ventilation. No clinically significant aspiration events were reported across studies. Moderate-certainty evidence supports HFNO as safe regarding gastric insufflation and antral cross-sectional area in most elective and procedural contexts. Low-certainty evidence suggests no increase in gastric volume. Caution is warranted due to limited, low-to-very-low-certainty evidence at higher flow rates and among critically ill patients. Larger multicenter trials and robust observational studies are necessary to confirm safety in these settings.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparison of deep and nondeep hypothermia in thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Deep hypothermic circulatory arrest (DHCA) remains a cornerstone technique for neuroprotection and end-organ preservation during ascending aorta and arch surgeries. However, its benefits and risks compared with non-DHCA strategies in thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair are uncertain owing to conflicting evidence and variable institutional practices. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis and Cochrane guidelines. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for comparative studies evaluating DHCA and non-DHCA techniques for open thoracic and TAAA repair. Random-effects models were applied to calculate pooled effect estimates. Effect sizes were risk ratio (RR) for binary end points and mean difference for continuous end points, both with 95% confidence intervals. Statistical significance was set at P < .05. Between-study heterogeneity was estimated using the I2 statistic. Metaregression analyses were used to explore the sources of heterogeneity. RESULTS: Nine observational studies, including 1041 patients, were analyzed. DHCA use was associated with a significantly lower risk of spinal cord injury (RR, 0.44; P = .012) compared with non-DHCA. However, DHCA was also associated with prolonged postoperative ventilation time (RR, 1.34; P = .003). No significant differences were observed in overall mortality, length of hospital and intensive care unit stay, stroke, or renal complications. Metaregression identified patient age as a moderator of length of stay variability, with older cohorts demonstrating longer recovery periods. CONCLUSIONS: DHCA is associated with a lower risk of spinal cord injury during TAAA repair without increasing mortality or stroke risk, although it is associated with longer ventilation times.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparison of Adult Tracheostomy Outcomes Before and After Implementation of a Dedicated Tracheostomy Team.

OBJECTIVE: (A) Determine patient and institutional factors associated with increased length of stay (LOS) and complications of tracheostomy, (B) Develop data-driven quality improvement in tracheostomy care. DESIGN: Mixed methods protocol used cross-sectional survey assessing institutional trends in tracheostomy-specific care. Retrospective chart review compared tracheostomy patient outcomes prior to and during implementation of a multidisciplinary tracheostomy care team and standardized guidelines. PARTICIPANTS: Patients undergoing tracheostomy from January 2019 to December 2021 at a tertiary hospital. METHODS: Patient factors, procedure type and indication, tracheostomy tube size, management timeline, insurance, and disease severity using Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score were analyzed for associations with LOS and adverse events. Multivariate analyses controlled for APACHE II score and payer source. LOS and complications were compared between patients before and during implementation of multidisciplinary tracheostomy care team and standardized guidelines. RESULTS: Three-hundred and eighteen patients met criteria with a 21.7% complication rate, average LOS of 24 days (SD = 28.523), and median LOS post-tracheostomy of 14 days (IQR 7, 29). Departments without standardized protocols had greater LOS (F[1,316] = 28.706, P < .001]) and complication odds (OR = 2.92, P = .015, 95% CI[1.231, 6.930]). Larger tracheostomy tube size was linked to increased LOS (β = .253, t(314) = 4.741, P < .001, 95% CI[4.137, 10.081]). Delays from ventilation discontinuation to cuffless tube exchange and decannulation correlated with increased LOS (β = .406, t(184) = 6.321, P < .001, 95% CI[.928, 1.771]); (β = .554, t(129) = 7.625, P < .001, 95% CI[1.008, 1.715]). When focusing on a single department, comparing 2019 patients to 2021 patients (pre- and post-guideline and care team), overall, LOS decreased from 33.08 to 30.83 days (P = .586). When excluding patients discharged on a ventilator, the 2019 group had average LOS of 37.938 days versus 33.41 days in 2021 (P = .344). CONCLUSIONS: Standardized tracheostomy care guidelines and multidisciplinary care teams are critical to improving institutional outcomes. Data-driven approaches to quality improvement ensure efficient and targeted methods to improving patient care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Development and validation of a comprehensive prognostic model for 28-day ICU mortality in non-traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage: an analysis based on the MIMIC-IV database.

BACKGROUND: Due to the complex pathophysiology of non-traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), accurate risk prediction remains a challenge. Our aim is to develop and validate a comprehensive prognostic model that integrates demographic characteristics, vital signs, laboratory parameters, and more, to provide clinical decision-making support in real-world practice. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 785 Non-traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage patients. The cohort was randomly divided into a training set (n = 549) and a validation set (n = 236). Feature selection was performed using LASSO regression, followed by backward stepwise Cox regression for optimization. A nomogram was constructed based on independent predictive factors, and model performance was assessed using discrimination, calibration, and decision curve analysis. To prevent immortal-time bias, all predictors were anchored to a fixed early (first-24-hour) measurement window, treatment variables were modelled as binary indicators rather than cumulative exposures, and a five-model sensitivity analysis with baseline-severity adjustment was performed. RESULTS: The development of our model followed a systematic approach: first, 15 potential predictive factors were selected via LASSO regression, which were then refined to 12 independent predictors using backward stepwise Cox regression. The final predictive factors included: Ventilation, AHT, Nimodipine 60 mg, Age, SAPS.II, Input amount, Calcium total, Platelet count, White blood cells, Anion gap, pH, and Chloride. The integrated model demonstrated excellent predictive ability for 7-day, 14-day, and 21-day mortality in both the training set (AUC: 0.972, 0.934, 0.898) and the validation set (AUC: 0.968, 0.948, 0.911). Calibration curves and decision curve analysis confirmed the model's reliability and clinical utility across different time points. We constructed a nomogram for individualized risk prediction. Univariate Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated significant stratification of survival outcomes by each predictor, while restricted cubic spline analysis revealed non-linear relationships between continuous variables and mortality risk. Random survival forest analysis identified the top three predictive factors (Nimodipine 60 mg, Ventilation, AHT) and compared them with our full 12-variable model, confirming superior performance of the integrated model at all time points. At the 28-day primary endpoint, the model achieved a time-dependent AUC of 0.898 (training) and 0.904 (validation); after restricting predictors to the early baseline window, the leakage-controlled model retained good discrimination (validation C-index 0.803). CONCLUSIONS: Our ICU 28-day mortality prognosis model demonstrated robust performance in predicting ICU 28-day mortality in non-traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage. The model, through the nomogram, provides individualized risk assessment, aiding clinical decision-making and patient stratification.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Teaching Engagement and Caregiving Help in the Intensive Care Unit (TEACH-ICU) Scale: Content Validity.

BACKGROUND: Having family members provide care to their loved ones in the intensive care unit (ICU) is a beneficial yet seldom implemented approach. For family members to perform caregiving, nurses must be willing to teach, and such willingness is a developing area of research. OBJECTIVES: To adapt an instrument validated in family members, the Family Willingness for Caregiving Scale, to address nurses' willingness to teach family members caregiving skills. METHODS: Purposive and snowball sampling were used to recruit 10 expert ICU nurses through the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses' research website and social media platforms. The researchers conducted cognitive interviews with the nurses to address the instrument's content validity. RESULTS: The scale was refined based on the participants' feedback. Items were deleted, added, and revised. Furthermore, scale instructions were adjusted to emphasize the willingness to teach families of patients receiving mechanical ventilation. Qualitative themes emerged related to barriers to family engagement, including time constraints, patient acuity, and nurse and family characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Content validity of the scale was assessed, with future research aimed at pilot testing and evaluating construct validity before using the scale as a research instrument. Practical implications include using the scale as an evaluation tool to determine nurses' willingness to teach family members about caregiving. After evaluation, various strategies could be incorporated to enhance family engagement in adult ICUs.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Anabolic androgen therapy in critically ill adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Critical illness is characterized by a catabolic, proinflammatory state. Anabolic agents, such as testosterone, have therefore been proposed as therapeutic targets. Our objectives were to assess the effects of testosterone in critically ill populations on patient-important outcomes and identify design limitations to inform future studies. We searched for randomized control trials (RCTs) through Medline, Embase, and EBM Reviews databases from inception through February 24, 2026, including English language articles enrolling adults (≥18 years) admitted to ICU where anabolic androgen therapies (AAT) were compared with placebo or standard of care. Studies had to report at least one of: mortality, ICU and hospital lengths of stay, or duration of mechanical ventilation. We extracted data independently using a standardized data extraction tool, and feedback was received from all co-authors to ensure agreement. For each outcome, we performed meta-analyses using a random-effects model with inverse variance weighting in RevMan. We used the GRADE approach to assess certainty in pooled estimates of effect. Of 1325 screened articles, we found 4 that fit our inclusion criteria. Together, we judged risk of bias as 'some concerns' in 3 trials and 'high' in the final trial, and ultimately found that the effects of anabolic-androgen therapy on patient-important outcomes uncertain. With the uncertainty of current evidence for the effects of anabolic-androgen therapy in critically ill adults, there is insufficient support for its routine use. Future randomized evidence is needed to determine whether anabolic-androgen therapy improves clinically-important outcomes and better define its safety profile in critically ill adults.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Effect of ketofol versus Fentanyl-Midazolam sedation on neurological recovery in traumatic brain Injury: A randomised study.

Neurological recovery after traumatic brain injury (TBI) is multifactorial, and sedation is a cornerstone of neurocritical care because of its neuroprotective role. Although ketofol is widely used for anaesthesia, its effectiveness as a sedative regimen in the intensive care unit (ICU) has not been well studied. This preliminary exploratory double-blind, randomised study compared ketofol (KP) with fentanyl-midazolam (FM) sedation in adults with moderate-to-severe TBI. Sedation was administered for 72 h and titrated to a Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) score ≤  - 3. The primary outcome was the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE) at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included GOSE at 90 days, incidence of propofol infusion syndrome (PRIS), duration of mechanical ventilation, haemodynamic stability, and ICU and hospital length of stay. Of 120 enrolled patients, 111 were included in the final analysis (57 FM, 54 KP). Baseline characteristics, including injury severity and Marshall CT scores, were comparable. At 30 days, good neurological recovery (GOSE 7-8) was more frequent in the KP group than the FM group (26% vs. 10.5%, p = 0.03). At 90 days, recovery remained higher with KP (44.4% vs. 33.3%), though the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.16). Multivariate analysis confirmed ketofol as an independent predictor of good recovery at 30 days (adjusted OR 3.63, 95% CI 1.11-11.85, p = 0.033). No PRIS occurred, and secondary outcomes were similar. Ketofol-based sedation was safe and may be associated with improved early neurological recovery compared with fentanyl-midazolam, with a favourable trend toward improved long-term neurological recovery.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

High-Dose Intravenous Vitamin C and Mortality and Organ Dysfunction in Severe Burn Injury: The VICTORY Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Severe burn injury triggers systemic inflammation that can lead to multiple organ dysfunctions and death. High-dose intravenous vitamin C has been proposed to mitigate these effects, but strong evidence in patients with burn injury is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of high-dose intravenous vitamin C in patients with severe burn injury. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial conducted across 24 burn centers in North, Central, and South America; Europe; and Asia. Adults (≥18 years) with deep second- and/or third-degree burns covering 20% or more of total body surface area and requiring skin grafting were enrolled between August 18, 2020, and September 12, 2025. Final follow-up was completed in March 2026. The trial was stopped early after the first prespecified interim analysis for futility/harm. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous vitamin C (50 mg/kg every 6 hours for 96 hours) or matched placebo. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was a composite of 28-day mortality and persistent organ dysfunction (defined as dependence on mechanical ventilation, kidney replacement therapy, or vasopressor/inotrope support at day 28). The main secondary outcome was time to discharge alive from hospital within 90 days. RESULTS: Among 238 patients enrolled (mean age, 48.9 [SD, 19.1] years; 79% male; mean total body surface area, 37.0% [SD, 14.6%]), 120 were assigned to vitamin C and 118 to placebo. The primary composite outcome occurred in 49 patients (40.8%) in the vitamin C group and 35 patients (29.7%) in the placebo group (adjusted risk ratio [RR], 1.28 [95% CI, 0.99-1.65]; P = .06), crossing the prespecified futility/harm threshold and prompting early trial termination. Time to discharge alive from hospital within 90 days was not improved (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.62-1.16]; P = .31). Twenty-eight-day mortality was higher in the vitamin C group (15.0% vs 7.6%; adjusted RR, 1.96 [95% CI, 1.32-2.90]; P = .001), as was hospital mortality (23.3% vs 16.1%; adjusted RR, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.03-2.00]; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with severe burn injury, high-dose intravenous vitamin C did not reduce 28-day mortality and persistent organ dysfunction and is possibly harmful. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04138394.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Empirical Meropenem Versus Piperacillin/Tazobactam for Critically Ill Adults With Sepsis: Feasibility of a Randomised Trial.

BACKGROUND: Meropenem and piperacillin/tazobactam are commonly used empirical antibiotics in critically ill adults with sepsis, but whether one is superior to the other is uncertain. METHODS: The Empirical Meropenem versus Piperacillin/Tazobactam for Adult Patients with Sepsis (EMPRESS) trial is an ongoing investigator-initiated, randomised, open-label, adaptive clinical trial with an integrated feasibility phase comparing empirical treatment with meropenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam in critically ill adults with sepsis. The integrated feasibility phase enrolled 200 participants across 10 intensive care units (ICUs) in Denmark between 28 June and 12 December 2025. Five pre-specified feasibility criteria were evaluated; if all feasibility criteria were met, the trial would proceed unaltered, whereas failure to meet one or more criteria would require intervention and re-evaluation. RESULTS: We randomised 200 of 284 screened patients (70.4%). The median age was 70 years (interquartile range (IQR): 60-77), 65.5% were males. At randomisation, 80.0% received vasopressors or inotropes, and 43.5% were on invasive mechanical ventilation. Four of five pre-specified feasibility criteria were met: time to completion of the feasibility phase (5.5 months vs. threshold < 12.0 months), recruitment proportion (70.4% vs. threshold ≥ 50.0%), proportion of participants without consent to the continued collection of data (2.5% vs. threshold < 5.0%) and protocol adherence (81.0% vs. threshold ≥ 75.0%). The proportion of participants with timely primary outcome data availability (30-day mortality) within 45 days was 85.5% and below the pre-specified threshold of ≥ 95.0%. The proportions were low in the first 3 months (33.3%, 22.2% and 30.8%, respectively), increasing to 95.8% in the last month of the feasibility phase. All-cause mortality at 30 days was 30.5%, and specific serious adverse reactions occurred in 4.0% of participants. CONCLUSIONS: In this integrated feasibility evaluation of the EMPRESS trial comparing empirical meropenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam in critically ill adults with sepsis, four of five pre-specified feasibility criteria were met. The unmet criterion, timely primary outcome data availability, improved substantially during the feasibility phase. We consider the trial feasible and will proceed without modifications. EDITORIAL COMMENT: This feasibility study assessed recruitment, randomised allocation and data collection for the multicentre EMPRESS trial. For adaptive trials on trial platforms, careful interim checking of trial design functions is an important and necessary process. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials Information System EUCT number: 2023-509703-33-00; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT06184659; Universal Trial Number: U1111-1301-6379.

Humans↗