Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · J Neuroanaesth Crit Care
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1787541
Original Article

Complete Closed-Loop Ventilatory Circuit Delays the Onset of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia in Mechanically Ventilated Neurological Patients in the ICU: A Single-Center Prospective Preliminary Study

Archana K. Raichurkar
1   Department of Anesthesiology, Manipal Hospital, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
,
V.J. Ramesh 
2   Department of Neuroanesthesia and Neurocritical Care, National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
,
Rohini M. Surve 
2   Department of Neuroanesthesia and Neurocritical Care, National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
,
H.B. Veena Kumari
3   Department of Neuro-Microbiology, National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
,
Dhritiman Chakrabarti
2   Department of Neuroanesthesia and Neurocritical Care, National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is preventable yet its incidence remains high. We compared conventional ventilator circuit with open suction and dual heated wire circuit (DHWC) with closed suction on the incidence of VAP.

Methods This is a single-center, prospective cohort study conducted at a tertiary care hospital in neurological patients admitted to the neuro-intensive care unit (neuro-ICU) and requiring mechanical ventilation (MV) for more than 48 hours. Patients were ventilated using either conventional ventilator circuit with open suction (open group) or DHWC with closed suction (closed group) and were observed for VAP during the first 14 days of MV. The incidence and day of onset of VAP, duration of MV, duration of neuro-ICU and hospital stay, and mortality was noted in each group.

Results A total of 63 patients were included (32 in open and 31 in closed group). The incidence of VAP was 9.3% in the open group and 12.9% in the closed group (p = 0.8). All the patients developed late VAP, that is, > 96 hours after intubation. However, as compared to the open group, VAP was observed much later in the closed group (day 7 vs. day 11). Duration of MV, neuro-ICU stay, hospital stay, and mortality did not differ significantly.

Conclusion In this study, VAP incidences are similar in both the groups. However, neurological patients requiring MV for a short period might benefit from the usage of DHWC with closed suction system as VAP was seen to occur later in this group. Further, a randomized controlled trial with larger sample size is desired to confirm our findings.

Keywords

dual heated wire circuit - closed suction system - open suction system - neurological illness - ventilator-associated pneumonia


Publication History

Article published online:
08 August 2024

© 2024. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Wu D, Wu C, Zhang S, Zhong Y. Risk factors of ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients. Front Pharmacol 2019; 10: 482
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Mehndiratta MM, Nayak R, Ali S, Sharma A, Gulati NS. Ventilators in ICU: a boon or burden. Ann Indian Acad Neurol 2016; 19 (01) 69-73
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Josephson SA, Moheet AM, Gropper MA, Nichols AD, Smith WS. Ventilator-associated pneumonia in a neurologic intensive care unit does not lead to increased mortality. Neurocrit Care 2010; 12 (02) 155-158
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Gadani H, Vyas A, Kar AK. A study of ventilator-associated pneumonia: Incidence, outcome, risk factors and measures to be taken for prevention. Indian J Anaesth 2010; 54 (06) 535-540
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Branson RD. The ventilator circuit and ventilator-associated pneumonia. Respir Care 2005; 50 (06) 774-785 , discussion 785–787
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 National Healthcare Safety Network. Device-associated module ventilator-associated event (VAE). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website. January 2017 . Accessed May 21, 2024 at: http://www.cdc.gov/nhsn/PDFs/pscManual/10-VAE_FINAL.pdf
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Deshmukh B, Kadam S, Thirumugam M, Rajesh K. Clinical study of ventilator-associated pneumonia in tertiary care hospital, Kolhapur, Maharashtra, India. Int J Res Med Sci 2017; 5: 2207-2211
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Ranjan N, Chaudhary U, Chaudhry D, Ranjan KP. Ventilator-associated pneumonia in a tertiary care intensive care unit: analysis of incidence, risk factors and mortality. Indian J Crit Care Med 2014; 18 (04) 200-204
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Papazian L, Klompas M, Luyt CE. Ventilator-associated pneumonia in adults: a narrative review. Intensive Care Med 2020; 46 (05) 888-906
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Patil HV, Patil VC. Incidence, bacteriology, and clinical outcome of ventilator-associated pneumonia at tertiary care hospital. J Nat Sci Biol Med 2017; 8 (01) 46-55
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Dettenkofer M, Ebner W, Els T. et al. Surveillance of nosocomial infections in a neurology intensive care unit. J Neurol 2001; 248 (11) 959-964
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Lorente L, Lecuona M, Jiménez A, Mora ML, Sierra A. Ventilator-associated pneumonia using a heated humidifier or a heat and moisture exchanger: a randomized controlled trial [ISRCTN88724583]. Crit Care 2006; 10 (04) R116
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Boots RJ, George N, Faoagali JL, Druery J, Dean K, Heller RF. Double-heater-wire circuits and heat-and-moisture exchangers and the risk of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Crit Care Med 2006; 34 (03) 687-693
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Alipour N, Manouchehrian N, Sanatkar M, Mohammadi Poor Anvari H, Sanie Jahromi MS. Evaluation of the effect of open and closed tracheal suction on the incidence of ventilator associated pneumonia in patients admitted in the intensive care unit. Arch Anesth & Crit Care. 2016; 2 (02) 193-196
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 David D, Samuel P, David T, Keshava SN, Irodi A, Peter JV. An open-labelled randomized controlled trial comparing costs and clinical outcomes of open endotracheal suctioning with closed endotracheal suctioning in mechanically ventilated medical intensive care patients. J Crit Care 2011; 26 (05) 482-488
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Ardehali SH, Fatemi A, Rezaei SF, Forouzanfar MM, Zolghadr Z. The effects of open and closed suction methods on occurrence of ventilator associated pneumonia; a comparative study. Arch Acad Emerg Med 2020; 8 (01) e8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Sanaie S, Rahnemayan S, Javan S, Shadvar K, Saghaleini SH, Mahmoodpoor A. Comparison of closed vs open suction in prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022; 26 (07) 839-845
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Chi SY, Kim TO, Park CW. et al. Bacterial pathogens of ventilator associated pneumonia in a tertiary referral hospital. Tuberc Respir Dis (Seoul) 2012; 73 (01) 32-37
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Kumari P, Datta P, Gombar S, Sharma D, Chander J. Epidemiology and clinical outcome of ventilator-associated events at a tertiary care hospital from North India. Trop Doct 2021; 51 (02) 162-167
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Venkataraman R, Divatia JV, Ramakrishnan N. et al. Multicenter observational study to evaluate epidemiology and resistance patterns of common intensive care unit-infections. Indian J Crit Care Med 2018; 22 (01) 20-26
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar