Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24308643›Full record

ArticleBMC anesthesiology2013

Repeated open endotracheal suctioning causes gradual desaturation but does not exacerbate lung injury compared to closed endotracheal suctioning in a rabbit model of ARDS.

Hideaki Sakuramoto, Nobutake Shimojo, Subrina Jesmin, Takeshi Unoki, Junko Kamiyama, Masami Oki, Ken Miya, Satoru Kawano, Taro Mizutani

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC anesthesiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Endotracheal Suctioning of the Critically Ill Child.Journal of pediatric intensive care · 2015
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hideaki Sakuramoto
Nobutake Shimojo
Subrina Jesmin
Takeshi Unoki
Junko Kamiyama
Masami Oki
Ken Miya
Satoru Kawano
Taro MizutaniDepartment of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8575, Japan. mizutani@md.tsukuba.ac.jp.
University of Tsukuba Hospital · JPUniversity of Tsukuba · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough endotracheal suctioning induces alveolar derecruitment during mechanical ventilation, it is not clear whether repeated endotracheal suctioning exacerbates lung injuries. The present study aimed to determine whether repeated open endotracheal suctioning (OS) exacerbates lung injury compared to closed endotracheal suctioning (CS) during mechanical ventilation in an animal model of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).

methodsBriefly, thirty six Japanese white rabbits were initially ventilated in pressure-controlled mode with a constant tidal volume (6 mL/kg). Then, lung injury was induced by repeated saline lavage. The rabbits were divided into four groups, namely: a) OS; b) CS; c) control with ARDS only; d) and healthy control (HC) without ARDS. Animals in all the groups were then ventilated with positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) at 10 cm H2O. CS was performed using 6 French-closed suctioning catheters connected to endotracheal tube under the following conditions: a) a suctioning time and pressure of 10 sec and 140 mm Hg, respectively; and b) a suction depth of 2 cm (length of adapter) plus tracheal tube. OS was performed using the same conditions described for CS, except the ventilator was disconnected from the animals. Each endotracheal suctioning was performed at an interval of 30 min.

resultsPaO2/FIO2 (P/F) ratio for CS, control and HC groups remained at >400 for 6 hours, whereas that of the OS group progressively declined to 300 (p < 0.05), with each suctioning. However, no difference was observed either in lung injury score (histology) or in the expression pattern of inflammatory cytokines (tumor necrosis factor-α and interleukin-6) after 6 hours between the OS and CS groups in the circulatory as well as the pulmonary tissues.

conclusionsProgressive arterial desaturation under conditions of repeated endotracheal suctioning is greater in OS than in CS time-dependently. However, OS does not exacerbate lung injury during mechanical ventilation when observed over a longer time span (6 hours) of repeated endotracheal suctioning, based on morphological and molecular analysis.

Identifiers

PMID24308643
PMCPMC3878988
OpenAlexW2036399511

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.