Effect of Noninvasive Ventilation After Unplanned Extubation

• Published in: Respiratory care Vol. 64; no. 3; pp. 248 - 254
• Main Authors: Kudela, Agathe, Millereux, Maude, Gouezel, Corentin, Prat, Dominique, Jacobs, Frédéric, Hamzaoui, Olfa, Demars, Nadège, Moneger, Guy, Dumenil, Anne Sylvie, Trouiller, Pierre, Sztrymf, Benjamin
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Daedalus Enterprises, Inc 01.03.2019; Daedalus Enterprises Inc
• Subjects: Academic Medical Centers; Adult; Aged; Airway Extubation; Complications and side effects; Critical Care - methods; Critical care medicine; Databases, Factual; Female; Follow-Up Studies; France; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Intratracheal intubation; Length of Stay; Life Sciences; Male; Mechanical ventilation; Methods; Middle Aged; Noninvasive Ventilation - methods; Patient outcomes; Physicians; Prophylaxis; Respiratory insufficiency; Respiratory Insufficiency - diagnosis; Respiratory Insufficiency - mortality; Respiratory Insufficiency - therapy; Retreatment - methods; Retrospective Studies; Risk Assessment; Statistics, Nonparametric; Sufentanil; Survival Rate; Treatment Outcome; France; re-intubation; ICU; unplanned extubation; prophylaxis; outcome; noninvasive ventilation
• ISSN: 0020-1324; 1943-3654
• DOI: 10.4187/respcare.06328

Our study set out to test the effect of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) performed after unplanned extubation. Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data in a university-affiliated mixed ICU of 12 beds during a 5-y period (January 2013 to December 2017). Unplanned extubation was defined as the occurrence of an unplanned removal of the endotracheal tube, whether deliberate or accidental. NIV after an unplanned extubation was not protocolized and was decided by the physician in charge on an individual basis. A total of 121 subjects (median [25th-75th percentile] age, 62.1 [43.3-73.6] y; median [25th-75th percentile] Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, 45 [36-54]) experienced 131 unplanned extubation episodes. Re-intubation was deemed necessary in 35 subjects (28.9%). NIV was used in 24 subjects (19.8%) (prophylactic NIV, = 10; rescue NIV, = 14). The re-intubation rates were 25.8%, 10%, and 64.3% in the no NIV, prophylactic, and rescue NIV subgroups, respectively. The median (25th-75th percentile) time to re-intubation was longer for subjects on NIV (9.1 [3.5-49.2] vs 0.46 [0.25-1] h, = .001). The median (25th-75th percentile) ICU length of stay and duration of mechanical ventilation were longer in the subjects who underwent NIV (14.5 [7-24.5] vs 6 [3-14] d, respectively, = .004; and 9 [3-22] vs 3 [1-7.3] d, respectively, = .003). NIV after unplanned extubation had uncertain efficacy, especially when provided as rescue management of postextubation respiratory failure.