Background: Mechanical ventilation in the prone position is used to improve oxygenation and to mitigate the harmful effects of mechanical ventilation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We sought to determine the effect of prone positioning on mortality among patients with ARDS receiving protective lung ventilation. Methods: We searched electronic databases and conference proceedings to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published through August 2013. We included RCTs that compared prone and supine positioning during mechanical ventilation in patients with ARDS. We assessed risk of bias and obtained data on all-cause mortality (determined at hospital discharge or, if unavailable, after longest follow-up period). We used random-effects models for the pooled analyses. Results: We identified 11 RCTs (n = 2341) that met our inclusion criteria. In the 6 trials (n = 1016) that used a protective ventilation strategy with reduced tidal volumes, prone positioning significantly reduced mortality (risk ratio 0.74, 95% confidence interval 0.59-0.95; I-2 = 29%) compared with supine positioning. The mortality benefit remained in several sensitivity analyses. The overall quality of evidence was high. The risk of bias was low in all of the trials except one, which was small. Statistical heterogeneity was low (I-2 < 50%) for most of the clinical and physiologic outcomes. Interpretation: Our analysis of high-quality evidence showed that use of the prone position during mechanical ventilation improved survival among patients with ARDS who received protective lung ventilation.

Effect of prone positioning during mechanical ventilation on mortality among patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis / S. Sud, J.O. Friedrich, N.K.J. Adhikari, P. Taccone, J. Mancebo, F. Polli, R. Latini, A. Pesenti, M.A.Q. Curley, R. Fernandez, M. Chan, P. Beuret, G. Voggenreiter, M. Sud, G. Tognoni, L. Gattinoni, C. Guérin. - In: CMAJ. - ISSN 0820-3946. - 186:10(2014 May 26), pp. E381-E390. [10.1503/cmaj.140081]

Effect of prone positioning during mechanical ventilation on mortality among patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

P. Taccone;F. Polli;A. Pesenti;L. Gattinoni;
2014-05-26

Abstract

Background: Mechanical ventilation in the prone position is used to improve oxygenation and to mitigate the harmful effects of mechanical ventilation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We sought to determine the effect of prone positioning on mortality among patients with ARDS receiving protective lung ventilation. Methods: We searched electronic databases and conference proceedings to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published through August 2013. We included RCTs that compared prone and supine positioning during mechanical ventilation in patients with ARDS. We assessed risk of bias and obtained data on all-cause mortality (determined at hospital discharge or, if unavailable, after longest follow-up period). We used random-effects models for the pooled analyses. Results: We identified 11 RCTs (n = 2341) that met our inclusion criteria. In the 6 trials (n = 1016) that used a protective ventilation strategy with reduced tidal volumes, prone positioning significantly reduced mortality (risk ratio 0.74, 95% confidence interval 0.59-0.95; I-2 = 29%) compared with supine positioning. The mortality benefit remained in several sensitivity analyses. The overall quality of evidence was high. The risk of bias was low in all of the trials except one, which was small. Statistical heterogeneity was low (I-2 < 50%) for most of the clinical and physiologic outcomes. Interpretation: Our analysis of high-quality evidence showed that use of the prone position during mechanical ventilation improved survival among patients with ARDS who received protective lung ventilation.
acute lung injury; randomized controlled-trial; frequency oscillatory ventilation; end-expiratory pressure; improves oxygenation; clinical-outcomes; publication bias; ards; failure; prevents
Settore MED/41 - Anestesiologia
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
E381.full.pdf

non disponibili

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 416.37 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
416.37 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Caricamento pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/2434/236418
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 68
  • Scopus 144
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 117
social impact