IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0248868.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prediction of extubation outcome in mechanically ventilated patients: Development and validation of the Extubation Predictive Score (ExPreS)

Author

Listed:
  • Antuani Rafael Baptistella
  • Laura Maito Mantelli
  • Leandra Matte
  • Maria Eduarda da Rosa Ulanoski Carvalho
  • João Antonio Fortunatti
  • Iury Zordan Costa
  • Felipe Gabriel Haro
  • Vanda Laís de Oliveira Turkot
  • Shaline Ferla Baptistella
  • Diego de Carvalho
  • João Rogério Nunes Filho

Abstract

Despite the best efforts of intensive care units (ICUs) professionals, the extubation failure rates in mechanically ventilated patients remain in the range of 5%–30%. Extubation failure is associated with increased risk of death and longer ICU stay. This study aimed to identify respiratory and non-respiratory parameters predictive of extubation outcome, and to use these predictors to develop and validate an “Extubation Predictive Score (ExPreS)” that could be used to predict likelihood of extubation success in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Derivation cohort was composed by patients aged ≥18 years admitted to the ICU and receiving IMV through an endotracheal tube for >24 hours. The weaning process followed the established ICU protocol. Clinical signs and ventilator parameters of patients were recorded during IMV, in the end phase of weaning in pressure support ventilation (PSV) mode, with inspiratory pressure of 7 cm H2O over the PEEP (positive end expiratory pressure). Patients who tolerated this ventilation were submitted to spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) with T-tube for 30 minutes. Those who passed the SBT and a subsequent cuff-leak test were extubated. The primary outcome of this study was extubation success at 48 hours. Parameters that showed statistically significant association with extubation outcome were further investigated using the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis to assess their predictive value. The area under the curve (AUC) values were used to select parameters for inclusion in the ExPreS. Univariable logistic regression analysis and ROC analysis were performed to evaluate the performance of ExPreS. Patients’ inclusion and statistical analyses for the prospective validation cohort followed the same criteria used for the derivation cohort and the decision to extubate was based on the ExPreS result. In the derivation cohort, a total of 110 patients were extubated: extubation succeeded in 101 (91.8%) patients and failed in 9 (8.2%) patients. Rapid shallow-breathing index (RSBI) in SBT, dynamic lung compliance, duration of IMV, muscle strength, estimated GCS, hematocrit, and serum creatinine were significantly associated with extubation outcome. These parameters, along with another parameter—presence of neurologic comorbidity—were used to create the ExPreS. The AUC value for the ExPreS was 0.875, which was higher than the AUCs of the individual parameters. The total ExPreS can range from 0 to 100. ExPreS ≥59 points indicated high probability of success (OR = 23.07), while ExPreS ≤44 points indicated low probability of success (OR = 0.82). In the prospective validation cohort, 83 patients were extubated: extubation succeeded in 81 (97.6%) patients and failed in 2 (2.4%) patients. The AUC value for the ExPreS in this cohort was 0.971. The multiparameter score that we propose, ExPreS, shows good accuracy to predict extubation outcome in patients receiving IMV in the ICU. In the prospective validation, the use of ExPreS decreased the extubation failure rate from 8.2% to 2.4%, even in a cohort of more severe patients.

Suggested Citation

  • Antuani Rafael Baptistella & Laura Maito Mantelli & Leandra Matte & Maria Eduarda da Rosa Ulanoski Carvalho & João Antonio Fortunatti & Iury Zordan Costa & Felipe Gabriel Haro & Vanda Laís de Oliveira, 2021. "Prediction of extubation outcome in mechanically ventilated patients: Development and validation of the Extubation Predictive Score (ExPreS)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(3), pages 1-18, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0248868
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248868
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0248868
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0248868&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0248868?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0248868. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.