2001•Journal of Intensive Care MedicineRequires access

Controversies in Weaning from Mechanical Ventilation

Scott K. Epstein

Open publisher page 3 citations

Abstract

Invasive mechanical ventilation can successfully support the patient with acute respiratory failure, but it is associated with considerable risks. Numerous complications of invasive mechanical ventilation have been identified, and these may contribute to increased mortality. Therefore after clinical improvement has occurred, considerable emphasis is placed on expeditiously freeing the patient from the ventilator. This process of getting a patient off mechanical ventilation has been variably termed weaning, liberation, or discontinuation (terms which may be used interchangeably), and can be further divided into “readiness testing” and “progressive withdrawal.” Over the last decade, new developments in our understanding of the process of weaning have provided investigators with the tools to address a number of key questions: How should readiness for weaning (and trials of spontaneous breathing) be determined? What is the role of weaning parameters in deciding when to initiate the weaning process? What is the best mode for conducting a spontaneous breathing trial and how should the patient be monitored? What are the mechanisms for weaning (and spontaneous breathing trial) failure? What is the best technique to facilitate progressive withdrawal? What other factors can facilitate liberation from mechanical ventilation? What are the risks of extubation failure and how can extubation outcome best be predicted? What is the role for protocols in facilitating weaning from mechanical ventilation?.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Invasive mechanical ventilation can successfully support the patient with acute respiratory failure, but it is associated with considerable risks. Numerous complications of invasive mechanical ventilation have been identified, and these may contribute to increased mortality. Therefore after clinical improvement has occurred, considerable emphasis is placed on expeditiously freeing the patient from the ventilator. This process of getting a patient off mechanical ventilation has been variably termed weaning, liberation, or discontinuation (terms which may be used interchangeably), and can be further divided into “readiness testing” and “progressive withdrawal.” Over the last decade, new developments in our understanding of the process of weaning have provided investigators with the tools to address a number of key questions: How should readiness for weaning (and trials of spontaneous breathing) be determined? What is the role of weaning parameters in deciding when to initiate the weaning process? What is the best mode for conducting a spontaneous breathing trial and how should the patient be monitored? What are the mechanisms for weaning (and spontaneous breathing trial) failure? What is the best technique to facilitate progressive withdrawal? What other factors can facilitate liberation from mechanical ventilation? What are the risks of extubation failure and how can extubation outcome best be predicted? What is the role for protocols in facilitating weaning from mechanical ventilation?.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 3 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Invasive mechanical ventilation can successfully support the patient with acute respiratory failure, but it is associated with considerable risks. Numerous complications of invasive mechanical ventilation have been identified, and these may contribute to increased mortality. Therefore after clinical improvement has occurred, considerable emphasis is placed on expeditiously freeing the patient from the ventilator. This process of getting a patient off mechanical ventilation has been variably termed weaning, liberation, or discontinuation (terms which may be used interchangeably), and can be further divided into “readiness testing” and “progressive withdrawal.” Over the last decade, new developments in our understanding of the process of weaning have provided investigators with the tools to address a number of key questions: How should readiness for weaning (and trials of spontaneous breathing) be determined? What is the role of weaning parameters in deciding when to initiate the weaning process? What is the best mode for conducting a spontaneous breathing trial and how should the patient be monitored? What are the mechanisms for weaning (and spontaneous breathing trial) failure? What is the best technique to facilitate progressive withdrawal? What other factors can facilitate liberation from mechanical ventilation? What are the risks of extubation failure and how can extubation outcome best be predicted? What is the role for protocols in facilitating weaning from mechanical ventilation?.

Key concepts: Spontaneous breathing trial, Mechanical ventilation, Medicine, Weaning, Discontinuation, Intensive care medicine, Ventilation (architecture), Clinical trial

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Controversies in Weaning from Mechanical Ventilation — Research Paper | ScholarLens