Search

Background: Although the weaning classification based on the difficulty and duration of the weaning process has been evaluated in the different type of intensive care units (ICUs), little is known about clinical outcomes and validity among the three groups in medical ICU. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the clinical relevance of weaning classification and its association with hospital mortality in a medical ICU with a protocol-based weaning program. Methods: All consecutive patients admitted to the medical ICU and requiring mechanical ventilation (MV) for more than 24 hours were prospectively registered and screened for weaning readiness by a standardized weaning program between July 2010 and June 2013. Baseline characteristics and outcomes were compared across weaning classifications. Results: During the study period, a total of 680 patients were weaned according to the standardized weaning protocol. Of these, 457 (67%) were classified as simple weaning, 136 (20%) as difficult weaning, and 87 (13%) as prolonged weaning. Ventilator-free days within 28 days decreased significantly from simple to difficult to prolonged weaning groups (P < 0.001, test for trends). In addition, reintubation within 48 hours after extubation (P < 0.001) and need for tracheostomy during the weaning process (P < 0.001) increased significantly across weaning groups. Finally, ICU (P < 0.001), post-ICU (P = 0.001), and hospital (P < 0.001) mortalities significantly increased across weaning groups. In a multiple logistic regression model, prolonged weaning but not difficult weaning was still independently associated with ICU (adjusted OR 8.265, 95% CI 3.484–19.605, P < 0.001), and post-ICU (adjusted OR 3.180, 95% CI 1.349–7.497, P = 0.005), and hospital (adjusted OR 5.528, 95% CI 2.801–10.910, P < 0.001) mortalities. Conclusions: Weaning classification based on the difficulty and duration of the weaning process may provide prognostic information for mechanically ventilated patients who undergo the weaning process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Surgical resection remains as the treatment of choice for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and provides the best opportunity for cure and long-term survival. Minimally invasive percutaneous ablative therapies, such as radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for treating lung cancers, are currently being studied as treatment alternatives. But, to date, there is little information on comparison of therapeutic effects between surgery and RFA in patients with early stage lung malignancy. We aimed to investigate the clinical significance of RFA as an alternative curative modality for the early stage lung cancer through analyzing the long-term mortality of both treatment groups; surgery vs. RFA. Twenty-two patients of stage I NSCLC were included for this comparative analysis. To minimize confounding effects, we conducted a matching process. In which patients of RFA group (n =8) were matched with patients of surgery group (n =14) on the following variables; gender, age (±3 years), tumor node metastasis stage, and calendar year of surgery or RFA (±2 years). The mean survival duration of RFA group and surgery group were 33.18±7.90 and 45.49±7.21, respectively (months, p =0.297). Log-rank analysis showed that there was no significant difference in overall survival (p =0.054) between two groups. These results have shown that RFA can offer the survival comparable to that by surgery to stage I NSCLC patients, especially to the patients impossible for the surgery. This study provides an evidence for the use of RFA as a treatment alternative with low procedural morbidity for inoperable early-stage NSCLC patients. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]