Evidence Hub

Impact of the timing of invasive mechanical ventilation in patients with sepsis: a multicenter cohort study

Gyungah Kim, D. Oh, Su-Ye-On Lee, M. Park, Chae-Man Lim

Critical Care, 2024

2,440 participants · 32 citations

Abstract

The potential adverse effects associated with invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) can lead to delayed decisions on starting MV. We aimed to explore the association between the timing of MV and the clinical outcomes in patients with sepsis ventilated in intensive care unit (ICU). We analyzed data of adult patients with sepsis between September 2019 and December 2021. Data was collected through the Korean Sepsis Alliance from 20 hospitals in Korea. Patients who were admitted to ICU and received MV were included in the study. Patients were divided into ‘early MV’ and ‘delayed MV’ groups based on whether they were on MV on the first day of ICU admission or later. Propensity score matching was applied, and patients in the two groups were compared on a 1:1 ratio to overcome bias between the groups. Outcomes including ICU mortality, hospital mortality, length of hospital and ICU stay, and organ failure at ICU discharge were compared. Out of 2440 patients on MV during ICU stay, 2119 ‘early MV’ and 321 ‘delayed MV’ cases were analyzed. The propensity score matching identified 295 patients in each group with similar baseline characteristics. ICU mortality was lower in ‘early MV’ group than ‘delayed MV’ group (36.3% vs. 46.4%; odds ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.47–0.93; p = 0.015). ‘Early MV’ group had lower in-hospital mortality, shorter ICU stay, and required tracheostomy less frequently than ‘delayed MV’ group. Multivariable logistic regression model identified ‘early MV’…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 2,440 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free