Trocador de calor e umidade: proteção contra infecções pulmonares? Estudo piloto

O objetivo deste trabalho foi realizar um estudo bacteriológico comparativo entre os sistemas de umidificação aquoso aquecido (UAA) e filtro trocador de calor e umidade (FTCU) quanto à colonização bacteriana e a incidência de infecção respiratória em pacientes submetidos à ventilação mecânica (VM). Trata-se de uma pesquisa prospectiva, controlada e randomizada, na qual 15 pacientes internados na Unidade de Terapia Intensiva (UTI) foram distribuídos em dois grupos. O primeiro fez uso de UAA (n=7) e o outro de FTCU (n=8). Foram coletadas amostras da secreção traqueal, condensado do circuito e FTCU na admissão do paciente, no quarto e oitavo dias, e realizada análise bacteriológica dos mesmos. Quanto às características antropométricas, não observou-se diferenças entre os grupos estudados. A prevalência de pneumonia associada à ventilação (PAV) foi de 57,1% no UAA e 62,5% no FTCU. Ao realizar a análise bacteriológica quantitativa entre eles, não foram observadas variações, sugerindo não haver diferença na prevenção de PAV entre os sistemas de umidificação; porém a presença das mesmas bactérias na secreção traqueal e no condensado e ausência destas na membrana do FTCU podem indicar que a principal fonte de contaminação é o próprio paciente.The aim of this study was to conduct a bacteriological research comparing the aqueous heated humidification systems (HH) and filter heat and moisture exchanger (FHME) and to bacterial colonization and the incidence of respiratory infection in patients undergoing mechanical ventilation. It is a prospective, controlled trial, in that 15 intensive care unit (ICU) patients were divided into two groups. The first made use of HH (n=7) and the other, FHME (n=8). We collected samples of tracheal secretions, and condensate circuit FHME at admission in the fourth and eighth day and bacteriological analysis of the same place. Regarding the anthropometric characteristics, no differences were observed between the groups. The prevalence of ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP) was 57.1% in the HH and 62.5% in FHME. When performing quantitative bacteriological analysis between the group and HH and FHME, differences were not observed, suggesting no variation in the prevention of VAP between the humidification systems, but the presence of these bacteria in the tracheal and condensate and in the absence of these membrane FHME may indicate that the main source of contamination is the patient himself

Does Valved Holding Chamber Improve Aerosol Lung Deposition with a Jet Nebulizer? A Randomized Crossover Study

Using valved holding chambers (VHC) during aerosol therapy has been reported to improve the inhaled dose with various aerosol devices, including vibrating mesh nebulizers. The aim of this study was to quantify the pulmonary deposition of a jet nebulizer (JN) with and without a VHC, and a mesh nebulizer (MN) with a VHC in a randomized cross-over trial with seven healthy consenting adults. Our hypothesis was that the use of a VHC would improve deposition with the JN. Diethylnitriaminopentacetic acid with technetium (DTPA-Tc99m), with the activity of 1 mC with 0.9% saline solution was nebulized. The radiolabeled aerosol was detected by 2D planar scintigraphy after administration. The pulmonary deposition was greater with a JN with a VHC (4.5%) than a JN alone (3.2%; p = 0.005. However, an MN with a VHC (30.0%) was six-fold greater than a JN or JN with a VHC (p < 0.001). The extrapulmonary deposition was higher in the JN group without a VHC than in the other two modalities (p < 0.001). Deposition in the device was greater with a JN + VHC than an MN+/VHC (p < 0.001). Lower residual drug at the end of the dose was detected with an MN than either JN configuration. The exhaled dose was greater with a JN alone than either an MN or JN with VHC (p < 0.001). In conclusion, the addition of the VHC did not substantially improve the efficiency of aerosol lung deposition over a JN alone

title.alternative

abstractresum

Impact of Gas Flow and Humidity on Trans-Nasal Aerosol Deposition via Nasal Cannula in Adults: A Randomized Cross-Over Study

Background: Trans-nasal pulmonary aerosol delivery using high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) devices is described with the administration of high gas flows exceeding patient inspiratory flow (HF) and with lower flows (LF). The aim of this pilot clinical trial was to compare deposition and distribution of radiolabeled aerosol via nasal cannula in healthy adults across three rates of gas flow delivered with active heated humidification, and to further identify the impact of aerosol administration without heated humidity. Methods: Twenty-three (23) healthy adults (16F) were randomized to receive aerosol with active heated humidification or unheated oxygen at gas flows of 10 L/min (n = 8), 30 L/min (n = 7), or 50 L/min (n = 8). Diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid labeled with 1 millicurie (37 MBq) of Technetium-99m (DTPA-Tc99m) was mixed with NaCl to a fill volume of 1 mL, and administered via mesh nebulizer placed at the inlet of the humidifier. Radioactivity counts were performed using a gamma camera and the regions of interest (ROIs) were delimited with counts from the lungs, upper airways, stomach, nebulizer, circuit, and expiratory filter. A mass balance was calculated and each compartment was expressed as a percentage of the total. Results: Lung deposition (mean ± SD) with heated humidified gas was greater at 10 L/min than 30 L/min or 50 L/min (17.2 ± 6.8%, 5.71 ± 2.04%, and 3.46 ± 1.24%, respectively; p = 0.0001). Using unheated carrier gas, a lung dose of aerosol was similar to the active heated humidification condition at 10 L/min, but greater at 30 and 50 L/min (p = 0.011). Administered gas flow and lung deposition were negatively correlated (r = −0.880, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Both flow and active heated humidity inversely impact aerosol delivery through HFNC. Nevertheless, aerosol administration across the range of commonly used flows can provide measurable levels of lung deposition in healthy adult subjects (NCT 02519465)

Association of Pain Catastrophizing with the Incidence and Severity of Acute and Persistent Perineal Pain after Natural Childbirth: Longitudinal Cohort Study

AbstractBackground and objectives Vaginal birth delivery may result in acute and persistent perineal pain postpartum. This study evaluated the association between catastrophizing, a phenomenon of poor psychological adjustment to pain leading the individual to magnify the painful experience making it more intense, and the incidence and severity of perineal pain and its relationship to perineal trauma.Method Cohort study conducted with pregnant women in labor. We used the pain catastrophizing scale during hospitalization and assessed the degree of perineal lesion and pain severity in the first 24hours and after 8 weeks of delivery using a numerical pain scale.Results We evaluated 55 women, with acute pain reported by 69.1%, moderate/severe pain by 36.3%, and persistent pain by 14.5%. Catastrophizing mean score was 2.15 ± 1.24. Catastrophizing patients showed a 2.90 relative risk (RR) for perineal pain (95% CI: 1.08-7.75) and RR: 1.31 for developing persistent perineal pain (95% CI: 1.05-1.64). They also showed a RR: 2.2 for developing acute and severe perineal pain (95% CI: 1.11-4.33).Conclusions The incidence of acute and persistent perineal pain after vaginal delivery is high. Catastrophizing pregnant women are at increased risk for developing acute and persistent perineal pain, as well as severe pain. Perineal trauma increased the risk of persistent perineal pain

Association of pain catastrophizing with the incidence and severity of acute and persistent perineal pain after natural childbirth: longitudinal cohort study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Vaginal birth delivery may result in acute and persistent perineal pain postpartum. This study evaluated the association between catastrophizing, a phenomenon of poor psychological adjustment to pain leading the individual to magnify the painful experience making it more intense, and the incidence and severity of perineal pain and its relationship to perineal trauma. METHOD: Cohort study conducted with pregnant women in labor. We used the pain catastrophizing scale during hospitalization and assessed the degree of perineal lesion and pain severity in the first 24 hours and after 8 weeks of delivery using a numerical pain scale. RESULTS: We evaluated 55 women, with acute pain reported by 69.1%, moderate/severe pain by 36.3%, and persistent pain by 14.5%. Catastrophizing mean score was 2.15 ± 1.24. Catastrophizing patients showed a 2.90 relative risk (RR) for perineal pain (95% CI: 1.08-7.75) and RR: 1.31 for developing persistent perineal pain (95% CI: 1.05-1.64). They also showed a RR: 2.2 for developing acute and severe perineal pain (95% CI: 1.11-4.33). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of acute and persistent perineal pain after vaginal delivery is high. Catastrophizing pregnant women are at increased risk for developing acute and persistent perineal pain, as well as severe pain. Perineal trauma increased the risk of persistent perineal pain.JUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: O parto vaginal pode resultar em dor perineal aguda e persistente pósparto. Este estudo avaliou a associação da catastrofização, fenômeno de má adaptação psicológica à dor que leva o indivíduo a magnificar a experiência dolorosa, tornando-a mais intensa, com a incidência e a intensidade da dor perineal e sua relação com o trauma perineal. MÉTODO: Estudo coorte. Realizado com gestantes em trabalho de parto. Foi aplicada a escala de pensamentos catastróficos sobre a dor durante o internamento e foram avaliados o grau da lesão perineal e a intensidade da dor perineal nas primeiras 24 horas e após oito semanas do parto por meio da escala numérica de dor. RESULTADOS: Avaliadas 55 mulheres. Sentiram dor aguda 69,1% das pacientes. Dessas, 36,3% queixaram-se de dor de moderada/forte intensidade e 14,5% de dor persistente. O escore médio de catastrofização foi de 2,15 ± 1,24. As pacientes catastrofizadoras apresentaram um risco 2,90 vezes maior (95% IC: 1,08-7,75) de apresentar dor perineal aguda e 1,31 vezes maior (95% IC: 1,05-1,64) de desenvolver dor perineal persistente. Também apresentaram um risco 2,2 vezes maior de desenvolver dor perineal aguda de maior intensidade (95% IC: 1,11-4,33). CONCLUSÕES: A incidência de dor perineal aguda e persistente após parto vaginal é alta. Gestantes catastrofizadoras apresentam maior risco de desenvolver dor perineal aguda e persistente, como também dor de maior intensidade. O trauma perineal aumentou o risco de ocorrência de dor perineal persistente.JUSTIFICATIVA Y OBJETIVOS: El parto vaginal puede traer dolor perineal agudo y persistente postparto. Este estudio evaluó la asociación de la catastrofización, fenómeno de mala adaptación psicológica al dolor, que hace con que el individuo exagere la experiencia dolorosa, convirtiéndola en algo más intenso, con la incidencia y la intensidad del dolor perineal y su relación con el trauma perineal. MÉTODO: Estudio de cohorte realizado con gestantes en trabajo de parto. Se aplicó la escala de pensamientos catastróficos sobre el dolor durante el ingreso, y se evaluaron el grado de la lesión perineal y la intensidad del dolor perineal en las primeras 24 horas y después de ocho semanas del parto, por medio de la escala numérica del dolor. RESULTADOS: Fueron evaluadas 55 mujeres. Sintieron dolor agudo 69,1% de las pacientes. De ellas, un 36,3% se quejaron de dolor de moderado/fuerte intensidad y 14,5% de dolor persistente. La puntuación promedio de catastrofización fue de 2,15 ± 1,24. Las pacientes catastrofizadoras tuvieron un riesgo 2,90 veces mayor (95% IC: 1,08-7,75) de presentar dolor perineal agudo y 1,31 veces mayor (95% IC: 1,05-1,64) de desarrollar dolor perineal persistente. También tuvieron un riesgo 2,2 veces mayor de desarrollar dolor perineal agudo de mayor intensidad (95% IC: 1,11-4,33). CONCLUSIONES: La incidencia de dolor perineal agudo y persistente posteriormente al parto vaginal es elevada. Las gestantes catastrofizadoras tienen un mayor riesgo de desarrollar dolor perineal agudo y persistente, como también dolor de mayor intensidad. El trauma perineal aumentó el riesgo de prevalencia de dolor perineal persistente