Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Search results
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

Search results

Comparison 1 Open suction system versus Closed suction system, Outcome 1 Ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Open suction system versus Closed suction system, Outcome 1 Ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP).

Comparison 1 Open suction system versus Closed suction system, Outcome 2 Time to VAP development.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Open suction system versus Closed suction system, Outcome 2 Time to VAP development.

Comparison 1 Open suction system versus Closed suction system, Outcome 3 Mortality.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Open suction system versus Closed suction system, Outcome 3 Mortality.

Comparison 1 Open suction system versus Closed suction system, Outcome 4 Time on ventilation (in days).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Open suction system versus Closed suction system, Outcome 4 Time on ventilation (in days).

Comparison 1 Open suction system versus Closed suction system, Outcome 5 Colonization.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Open suction system versus Closed suction system, Outcome 5 Colonization.

Comparison 1 Open suction system versus Closed suction system, Outcome 6 Length of stay in ICU (in days).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 Open suction system versus Closed suction system, Outcome 6 Length of stay in ICU (in days).

Table 1. Description of endotracheal suctioning procedure: patient preparation

Study

Hyperinflation

Hyperoxygenation

Hyperventilation

Sodium Chloride 0.9%

Adams 1997

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Cereda 2001

Not done

Not done

Not stated

Not stated

Combes 2000

Not stated

Done in the OTSS group

Not stated

Not stated

Conrad 1989

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Deppe 1990

Not stated

Done

Not stated

Done

Gallagher 1994

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Johnson 1994

Not stated

Done

Not stated

Done (3‐5 ml)

Lee 2001

Not stated

Done

Not stated

Not stated

Lorente 2005

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Lorente 2006

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Rabitsch 2004

Not stated

Done

Not stated

Not stated

Topeli 2005

Not stated

Done

Not stated

Not stated

Welte 1997

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not done

Witmer 1991

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Zeitoun 2003

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Zielmann 1992

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Figuras y tablas -
Table 1. Description of endotracheal suctioning procedure: patient preparation
Table 2. Description of endotracheal suctioning procedure: suction event

Study

Aseptic technique

Negative pressure

Suct. catheter size

Number of suctions

Suction duration

Patient assessment

Patient monitoring

Adams 1997

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

CTSS:16.6 (2‐33) vs OTSS:10 (0‐43)

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

Cereda 2001

Not stated

100 mmHg

12 French

CTSS:2 vs OTSS:2

20 seconds

Yes

Yes

Combes 2000

Yes

80 mmHg

Not stated

1 every 2 hours

10 seconds

Yes

Not stated

Conrad 1989

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

CTSS:10.6 vs OTSS:8.8

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

Deppe 1990

Yes

80 mmHg

Not stated

CTSS:16.6 vs OTSS:12

10 seconds

Yes

Not stated

Gallagher 1994

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

Johnson 1994

Not stated

CTSS:80‐100 mmHg vs OTSS:100‐120 mmHg

Not stated

At discretion of the patient's bedside nurse (CTSS:149 OTSS:127)

<15 seconds

Yes

Yes

Lee 2001

Not stated

Not stated

CTSS:12 French

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Yes

Lorente 2005

Done for the OTSS

Not stated

Not stated

CTSS:8.1±3.5 vs OTSS:8.3±3.7

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

Lorente 2006

Done for the OTSS

Not stated

Not stated

CTSS:8.1±2.7 vs OTSS:7.9±2.6

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

Rabitsch 2004

Yes

Not stated

Not stated

Day 1: CTSS:7 (6‐9) vs OTSS:8 (6‐9); Day 3: CTSS:8 (6‐9) vs OTSS:8 (6‐10)

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

Topeli 2004

Done for the OTSS

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

Welte 1997

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

Witmer 1991

Not stated

120 torr

14 French

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

Zeitoun 2003

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Zielmann 1992

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Median of 15 suctions

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

Figuras y tablas -
Table 2. Description of endotracheal suctioning procedure: suction event
Table 3. Description of endotracheal suctioning procedure: follow up after the procedure

Study

Hyperinflation

Hyperoxygenation

Hyperventilation

Patient monitoring

Adams 1997

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Cereda 2001

Not done

Not done

Not stated

Done

Combes 2000

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Conrad 1989

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Deppe 1990

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Gallagher 1994

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Johnson 1994

Not done

Not done

Not done

Done

Lee 2001

Not done

Not done

Not done

Done

Lorente 2005

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Lorente 2006

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Rabitsch 2004

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Done

Topeli 2004

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Welte 1997

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Witmer 1991

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Zeitoun 2003

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Zielmann 1992

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Figuras y tablas -
Table 3. Description of endotracheal suctioning procedure: follow up after the procedure
Table 4. Risk of VAP related to patient conditions

Study

Age

ARDS

Chest trauma

Coma/impaired consc.

Severe chronic dis.

Severity of illness

Smoking history

Adams 1997

CTSS:49.3; OTSS:55.8

No

No

No

Yes

Child Pug Score for CTSS:A=3, B=7; Child Pug Score for OTSS:A=2, B=7, C=1

Not stated

Cereda 2001

58.6±15.9

3/10

No

No

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Combes 2000

CTSS:43±20.7; OTSS:43.8±17.8

Not stated

Not stated

Glasgow Coma Scale for CTSS:8.1 (4.9); Glasgow Coma Scale for OTSS:7.6 (4.4)

Not stated

SAPS for CTSS:7.88 (3.2); SAPS for OTSS:6.91 (2.44)

Not stated

Conrad 1989

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Deppe 1990

53.2 (16‐85)

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

APACHE/TISS

Yes

Gallagher 1994

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

APACHE II/AIS 80/TISS

Yes

Johnson 1994

CTSS:44; OTSS:42

No

CTSS:4; OTSS:8

Not stated

COPD on CTSS:3; COPD on OTSS:4

Average APACHE score:12; Trauma ISS score for CTSS:35; Trauma ISS score for OTSS:31

Not stated

Lee 2001

69.7±16.1

No

No

Glasgow Coma Scale:10.6±0.7

No

APACHE II:21.2

Not stated

Lorente 2005

CTSS:59.4±16; OTSS:58.2±16.3

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

APACHE for CTSS:15.4±6.2; APACHE for OTSS:15.8±6.3

Not stated

Lorente 2006

CTSS:59.6±16.5; OTSS:59.2±16.1

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

APACHE for CTSS:13.8±8.8; APACHE for OTSS:13.7±8.7

Not stated

Rabitsch 2004

CTSS:64 (51‐75); OTSS:63 (50‐79)

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

APACHE II

Not stated

Topeli 2004

CTSS:60.6±2.7; OTSS:67.9±2.6

Not stated

Not stated

Glasgow Coma Scale for CTSS:11.1±0.6; Glasgow Coma Scale for OTSS:11.2±0.7

Not stated

APACHE II for CTSS:25.6±1.1; APACHE for OTSS:23.8±1.3

Not stated

Welte 1997

CTSS:47.9; OTSS:51.8

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Witmer 1991

59

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

Not stated

Zeitoun 2003

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

APACHE II for CTSS:24; APACHE II for OTSS:22

Yes

Zielmann 1992

CTSS:38 (18‐84); OTSS:44 (18‐97)

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Figuras y tablas -
Table 4. Risk of VAP related to patient conditions
Table 5. Risk of VAP related to intervention factors

Study

Antacids

Antibiotic therapy

Sedation

H2 blockers

Intracr pres monitor

MV > 48 hours

NG tube

Adams 1997

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Cereda 1997

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

No

Not stated

Not stated

Combes 2000

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

Yes

Yes

Conrad 1989

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Yes

Deppe 1990

Yes

Yes

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

Yes

Yes

Gallagher 1994

Yes

Yes

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Johnson 1994

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Lee 2001

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Lorente 2005

Yes

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Yes

Lorente 2006

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Rabitsch 2004

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

Topeli 2004

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Yes

Welte 1997

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

Witmer 1991

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

Zeitoun 2003

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not stated

Yes

Not stated

Zielmann 1992

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Figuras y tablas -
Table 5. Risk of VAP related to intervention factors
Table 6. Methodological quality of included studies

Study

Randomization

Allocation Concealm.

Blinded Assessment

Follow up

Adams 1997

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Cereda 2001

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Combes 2000

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Conrad 1989

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Unclear (17 patients randomized to the OTSS, but the VAP rate was reported only for 15 patients)

Deppe 1990

Adequate (random number table)

Not stated

Yes

Yes

Gallagher 1994

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Johnson 1994

Inadequate (randomization based on bed availability)

Inadequate

Not stated

Yes (3 losses were reported: 1 patient in OTSS passed to CTSS, and 2 withdrawals in CTSS)

Lee 2001

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Yes (1 follow up loss for the ECG analysis)

Lorente 2005

Adequate (random number table)

Adequate (independent office)

Yes

Yes

Lorente 2006

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Rabitsch 2004

Adequate (random number list)

Adequate (sealed envelopes provided by an independent deparment)

Yes

Yes

Topeli 2004

Inadequate (even file patient numbers were randomized to CTSS, and odd file numbers to the OTSS)

Inadequate

No (personal communication)

Yes

Welte 1997

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Witmer 1991

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Zeitoun 2003

Inadeqaute (admitted on even dates randomized to OTSS, and admitted on odd dates to CTSS)

Inadequate

Not stated

Yes

Zielmann 1992

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

Yes

Figuras y tablas -
Table 6. Methodological quality of included studies
Table 7. Included studies results

Outcomes

Results

Primary Outcomes

Ventilator‐associated pneumonia

Adams 1997
VAP (NS): 0/10 CTSS, 0/10 OTSS.

Combes 2000
1. VAP (NS):
CTSS: 7.4% (4/54) representing 7.32 VAP per 1000 patient days.
OTSS: 18% (9/50) representing 15.98 VAP per 1000 patient days.
OTSS was accompanied by a 3.5 fold higher risk of VAP; prophylactic use of gastric acid secretion inhibitors increased this risk 4.3 times (P 0.04).
2. Time to the VAP occurrence (NS): 5 (3‐10) days CTSS, 5 (2‐23) days OTSS.

Conrad 1989
Nosocomial pneumonia (NS): 38% (6/16) CTSS, 35.3% (6/17) OTSS.
Time to infection (NS): 5.8 ± 2.6 days CTSS, 4.1 ± 0.9 days OTSS.
Infection rate (NS): 0.04 per day CTSS, 0.054 per day OTSS.

Deppe 1990
Nosocomial pneumonia incidence (NS): 26% (12/46) CTSS, 29% (11/38) OTSS.
When evaluating 1) hospitalization <72h prior to entering the study (N: 52) and 2) hospitalization >72h prior to entering the study (N: 32) there was no statistical difference between CTSS and OTSS.

Johnson 1994
Nosocomial pneumonia (NS): 50% (8/16) CTSS vs. 52.6% (10/19) OTSS.

Lorente 2005
1. VAP (NS): 20.47% (43/210) CTSS, 18.02% (42/233) OTSS.
2. Cases of VAP per 1000 days of mechanical ventilation (NS): 17.59% (46/2615) CTSS, 15.84% (47/2966) OTSS.

Lorente 2006
1. VAP
CTSS= 13.9% (33/236)
OTSS = 14.1% (31/221) (P=0.99)
2. Cases of ventilator associated pneumonia per 1000 days of mechanical ventilation
CTSS = 14.1% (33/2336)
OTSS = 14.6% (31/2113) (P=0.8)

Rabitsch 2004
VAP: 0% (0/12) CTSS, 41.67% (5/12) OTSS (P=0.037)

Topeli 2004
1. VAP (NS): 31.7% (13/41) CTSS, 24.3% (9/37) OTSS.
2. Time from intubation to the development of VAP (NS): 8.1±1 days CTSS, 7.7±2.3 days OTSS.

Welte 1997
VAP (signification not stated): 33.3% (9/27) CTSS, 64% (16/25) OTSS.

Zeitoun 2003
VAP (NS): 30.4% (7/23) CTSS, 45.8% (11/24) OTSS.

Mortality

Combes 2000
Mortality (NS): 26% (14/54) CTSS, 28% (14/50) OTSS.

Deppe 1990
Mortality (NS): 26% (12/46) CTSS, 29% (11/38) OTSS.

Lorente 2005
Mortality (NS): 24.7% (52/210) CTSS, 21.4% (50/233) OTSS.

Lorente 2006
Mortality
CTSS = 13.1% (31/236)
OTSS = 13.5% (30/221) (P=0.78)

Topeli 2004
3. Mortality in ICU (NS): 65.9% (27/41) CTSS, 67.6% (25/37) OTSS.


Surrogate outcome: Time on ventilation
Conrad 1989
Time on ventilator (NS): 12.4 (15.2) days CTSS, 7.6 (5.2) days OTSS.

Lorente 2005
Days on mechanical ventilation (NS): 12.45±14.07 CTSS, 12.72±14.14 OTSS.

Lorente 2006
Days on mechanical ventilation
CTSS =9.9±12.1
OTSS =9.5±12.1 (P=0.76)

Topeli 2004
Duration of MV (NS): 8.2±0.7 days CTSS, 7.5±1.0 days OTSS.

Secondary Outcomes

Bacterial Colonization

Adams 1997
Microbiological analysis of endotracheal aspirate (NS):
Patients with microorganism isolated for CTSS at 24 hours: 3/10; at day 2‐3: 3/6; at day 4‐5: 0/0; at day 6‐7: 0/0.
Patients with microorganism isolated for OTSS at 24 hours: 3/10; at day 2‐3: 2/3; at day 4‐5: 1/2; at day 6‐7: 1/1.

Deppe 1990
Colonization rates (P<0.02): 67% (31/46) CTSS, 39% (15/38) OTSS.

Gallagher 1994
1. Colonization incidence with acinetobacter calcoaceticus (NS): 13/99 CTSS, 7/99 OTSS.
2. Time to colonization (NS): 53.5 (15.5‐313.0) CTSS, 132.0 (28.5‐368.5) OTSS.

Topeli 2004
Colonization rate (NS): 16/41 CTSS, 13/37 OTSS.

Welte 1997
Colonization (NS): 14.8% (4/27) CTSS, 8% (2/25) OTSS.

Surrogate outcome: Cross‐contamination
Rabitsch 2004
Cross‐contamination between the bronchial system and the gastric juices (P=0.037; as reported by the authors)
0% (0/12) CTSS, 41.67% (5/12) OTSS.
5. VAP (P=0.037; as reported by the authors)
0% (0/12) CTSS, 41.67% (5/12) OTSS.

Length of stay in the ICU

Combes 2000
Length of stay (NS): 15.6 ± 13.4 days CTSS, 19.9 ± 16.7 days OTSS.

Topeli 2004
Length of ICU stay (NS): 12.3±7.04 days CTSS, 11.5±8.54 days OTSS.

Respiratory outcomes

Cereda 2001
1. Drop in lung volume (P<0.05): ‐133.5 ± 129.9 CTSS, ‐1231.5 ± 858.3 OTSS.
2. SpO2 (P<0.05): 97.2 ± 2.9 CTSS, 94.6 ± 5.1 OTSS.
3. PaO2 (NS): before suctioning with CTSS (123.5±26.1) and after suctioning with CTSS (123.2±25.7). Before suctioning with OTSS (122.6±26.0) and after suctioning with OTSS (117.3±31.1).
4. PaCO2 (NS): before suctioning with CTSS (48.1±14.3) and after suctioning with CTSS (47.9±14). Before suctioning with OTSS (47.4±14.0) and after suctioning with OTSS (49.2±14.3).
5. PaO2 (NS): before suctioning with CTSS (123.5±26.1) and after suctioning with CTSS (123.2±25.7). Before suctioning with OTSS (122.6±26.0) and after suctioning with OTSS (117.3±31.1).
6. HbO2 (NS): before suctioning with CTSS (95.6±2.6) and after suctioning with CTSS (95.7±2.6). Before suctioning with OTSS (96.6±2.7) and after suctioning with OTSS (95.2±3.3).
7. Respiratory rate (P<0.05): before suctioning with CTSS (15.1±4.5), during suction (39.8±6.6) and after suctioning with CTSS (15.1±5.4). Before suctioning with OTSS (15.1±4.3) and after suctioning with OTSS (15.1±4.3).
8. Airway pressure (P<0.05): before suctioning with CTSS (15.9±5.1), during suction (18.0±5.5) and after suctioning with CTSS (15.9±5.1). Before suctioning with OTSS (16±5.1) and after suctioning with OTSS (15.9±5.1).

Johnson 1994
1. Mean arterial pressure
Change from B to AH (P=0.0019): +0.7% (89±1.3mmHg) CTSS vs. +4% (92±1.7 mmHg) OTSS.
Change from B to AS (P=0.0001): +8.6% (97±1.4 mmHg) CTSS vs. +17.3% (102±1.7 mmHg) OTSS.
Change from B to 30s (P=0.0001): +7.9% (101±1.6 mmHg) CTSS vs. +15.2% (96±1.2 mmHg) OTSS.
2. Oxygen saturation
Change from B to AH (P=0.0005): +0.3% (98±0.2%) CTSS vs. ‐0.4% (97±0.3%) OTSS.
Change from B to AS (P=0.0001): +1.6% (99±0.1%) CTSS vs. ‐1.1% (99±0.1%) OTSS.
Change from B to 30s (P=0.0001): +1.4% (99±0.1%) CTSS vs. ‐0.4% (97±0.1%) OTSS.
3. Systemic venous oxygen saturation
Change from B to AH (NS): +0.3% (73±0.9%) CTSS vs. ‐0.9% (72±0.9%) OTSS.
Change from B to AS (P=0.0001): +2.1% (74±0.9%) CTSS vs. ‐8.3% (67±1.5%) OTSS.
Change from B to 30s (P=0.0001): +3.4% (75±1.0%) CTSS vs. ‐7.7% (67±1.4%) OTSS.

Lee 2001
1. Oxygen saturation (NS at BL1, T2 and T5. Significant at S1, S2 and BL2)
Values at BL1 (NS): 96.36±3.27% CTSS vs 95.50±4.70% OTSS.
Values at T2 (NS): 95.79±3.87% CTSS vs 94.86±5.99% OTSS.
Values at T5 (NS): 95.5±3.74% CTSS vs 94.93±5.34% OTSS.
Values at S1 (P<0.05): 98.29±2.40% CTSS vs 97±4.66% OTSS (CTSS BL1 vs CTSS S1; OTSS BL1 vs OTSS S1).
Values at BL2 (P<0.05): 98.07±2.87% CTSS vs 95.36±5.9% OTSS (CTSS BL1 vs CTSS BL2; CTSS vs OTSS).
Values at S2 (P<0.05): 97±3.64% CTSS vs 95.79±5.67% OTSS (CTSS vs OTSS).
2. Mean arterial pressure (NS at BL1, T2 and T5. Significant at S1, S2 and BL2)
Values at BL1 (NS): 87.57±18.03 mmHg CTSS vs 89.43±19.54 mmHg OTSS.
Values at T2 (NS): 91.29±19.35 mmHg CTSS vs 89.43±18.59 mmHg OTSS.
Values at T5 (NS): 86.86±17.68 mmHg CTSS vs 85.36±16.75 mmHg OTSS.
Values at S1 (P<0.05): 91.21±18.58 mmHg CTSS vs 92.79±17.98 mmHg OTSS (CTSSBL1 vs. CTSSS1).
Values at BL2 (P<0.05): 84.64±19.68 mmHg CTSS vs 93.14±21.03 mmHg OTSS (OTSSBL1 vs OTSSBL2; CTSS vs OTSS).
Values at S2 (P<0.05): 92.36±21.44 mmHg CTSS vs 95.71±21.73 mmHg OTSS. (CTSSBL1 vs CTSSS2; OTSSBL1 vs OTSSS2)
3. Respiratory rate (NS at BL1, S1, BL2, S2, T2 and T5)
Values at BL1 (NS): 21.43±7.61 breaths/min CTSS vs 20.21±6.44 breaths/min OTSS.
Values at S1 (NS): 20.14±6.63 breaths/min CTSS vs 22±9.98 breaths/min OTSS.
Values at BL2 (NS): 20.43±7.45 breaths/min CTSS vs 23.21±10.23 breaths/min OTSS:
Values at S2 (NS): 22.43±7.39 breaths/min CTSS vs 23.29±10.62 breaths/min OTSS.
Values at T2 (NS): 23.14±8.5 breaths/min CTSS vs 22.14±8.58 breaths/min OTSS.
Values at T5 (NS): 23.43±7.95 breaths/min CTSS vs 21.07±7.49 breaths/min OTSS.

Rabitsch 2004
Oxygen saturation:
SaO2 at beginning of suctioning day1: 96.3±1.4% CTSS, 97.2±1.9% OTSS.
SaO2 at the end of suctioning day1: 96.8±1.0% CTSS, 89.6±2.5% CTSS.
(P<0.0001) OTSS at the beginning of suctioning vs. OTSS at the end of suctioning.
Sa O2 at beginning of suctioning day3: 97.0±1.4% CTSS, 96.8±1.0% OTSS.
Sa O2 at the end of suctioning day3: 96.4±0.8 CTSS, 89.6±1.9 CTSS.
(P<0.0001) OTSS at the beginning of suctioning vs. OTSS at the end of suctioning.

Cardiovascular outcomes

Cereda 2001
1. Heart rate (NS): before suctioning with CTSS (97.1±21.9), during suction (100.2±20.0) and after suctioning with CTSS (97.6±21.3). Before suctioning with OTSS (98.7±22.3) during suction (97.5±21.4) and after suctioning with OTSS (98.1±22.5).
2. Mean arterial pressure (P<0.05): before suctioning with CTSS (79.4±11.7), during suction (81.2±11.9) and after suctioning with CTSS (80.0±11.6). Before suctioning with OTSS (78.1±10.2) during suction (83.2±14.7) and after suctioning with OTSS (84.5±13.6).

Johnson 1994
1. Heart rate
Change from B to AH (NS): +1.2% (98±1.4 beats/min) CTSS vs +2.2% (108±1.8 beat/min) OTSS.
Change from B to AS (NS): +5.7% (102±1.5 beats/min) CTSS vs +8.1% (114±1.7 beat/min) OTSS.
Change from B to 30s (P=0.0209): +3.6% (100±1.4 beats/min) CTSS vs +6.4% (112±1.8 beats/min) OTSS.
2. Heart rhythm (P = 0.0001)
Dysrhythmias 2% (3/149 suctioning passes) CTSS vs 14% (8/127 suctioning passes) OTSS.

Lee 2001
1. Heart rate (NS at BL1, T2 and T5. Significant at S1, S2 and BL2)
Values at BL1 (NS): 100±19.6beats/min CTSS vs 100.29±22.05 beats/min OTSS.
Values at T2 (NS): 100.43±19.79 beats/min CTSS vs 106.86±29.87 beats/min OTSS.
Values at T5 (NS): 99.43±21.51 beats/min CTSS vs 105.07±29.65 beats/min OTSS.
Values at S1 (P<0.05): 96.43±20.4 beats/min CTSS vs 102.29±20.53 beats/min OTSS.
Values at BL2 (P<0.05): 96.14±20 beats/min CTSS vs 101±20.49 beats/min OTSS. (CTSSBL1 vs CTSSBL2)
Values at S2 (P<0.05): 97.43±19.79 beats/min CTSS vs. OTSS: 106.86±29.87 beats/min;
2. Heart rhythm (P<0.05)
Dysrhythmias 0% (0/13 suctioning manoeuvre) CTSS, 38.5% (5/13 suctioning manoeuvre) OTSS.

Technique related outcomes

Adams 1997
Suctions per day (NS): 16.6 (2‐33) CTSS, 10 (0‐43) OTSS

Conrad 1989
1. Suction frequency (NS): 10.6 per day CTSS, 8.8 per day OTSS.
2. Antibiotic usage (NS): 94% (15/16) CTSS, 88% (15/17) OTSS.
3. Nasogastric tube (NS): 50% (8/16) CTSS, 36% (6/17) OTSS.

Deppe 1990
Suctions per day (P<0.054): 16.6 CTSS, 12.4 OTSS. Analysis performed in 41 patients, 23 CTSS, 18 OTSS.

Lorente 2005
Aspirations per day (NS): 8.13±3.54 CTSS, 8.32±3.71 OTSS.

Lorente 2006
Aspirations per day
CTSS =8.1±2.7
OTSS =7.9±2.6 (P=0.64)

Rabitsch 2004
1. Number of suctioning per day (NS)
Day1, 7 (6‐9) and day3, 8 (6‐9) for CTSS. Day1, 8 (6‐9) and day3, 8 (6‐10) for OTSS.
2. Quantity of secretions (NS)
Day1, 2 little, 6 moderate, 4 profuse. Day3, 2 little, 6 moderate, 4 profuse for CTSS.
Day1, 2 little, 7 moderate, 3 profuse. Day3, 2 little, 6 moderate, 4 profuse for OTSS.

Witmer 1991
Quantity of secretions removed (NS): 1.7 g CTSS, 1.9 g OTSS

Zielmann 1992
Suctions performed. During the total study period a median of 15 suction manoeuvres were performed; group distribution not stated.

Nursing related outcomes

Johnson 1994
Nursing time (P = 0.0001): 93 seconds per procedure CTSS vs 153 seconds per procedure OTSS

Zielmann 1992
Nursing time (significance data not stated): 2.5 (2‐4) CTSS, 3.5 (2‐6) OTSS.

Comments

The outcomes showed significant differences, unless otherwise stated (NS)
ALI: acute lung injury; ARDS: acute respiratory distress syndrome; COPD: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; CTSS: closed tracheal suction system; ET: endotracheal; ICU: intensive care unit; MV: mechanical ventilation; NS: non‐significant; OTSS: open tracheal suction system; PEEP: positive‐pressure respiration; RCT: randomized controlled trial; VAP: ventilator associated pneumonia

Johnson 1994: Data was collected before suctioning, baseline (B), after hyperoxygenation (AH), immediately after suctioning (AS) and 30 seconds after suctioning (30s).

Lee 2001: Data was collected before the two suction manoeuvres (BL1 and BL2), at the moment of the manoeuvres (S1 and S2), and then 2 and 5 minutes post‐suctioning (T2 and T5).

Figuras y tablas -
Table 7. Included studies results
Table 8. Costs

Study

Costs CTSS

Costs OTSS

Comments

Adams 1997

Average daily costs: £16.89 sterling

Average daily costs: £1.45 sterling

Johnson 1994

Daily cost: US$13.00

Daily cost: US$14.88

Results based on a unit average of 16 suctioning procedures per patient per day

Lorente 2005

Patient costs per day: US$ 11.11±2.25

Patient costs per day: US$ 2.50±1.12

Lorente 2006

Patient costs per day: eur 2.3±3.7

Patient costs per day: eur 2.4±0.5

For patients ventilated lower than 4 days the CTSS costs were higher than those of the OTSS (CTSS = eur 7.2±4.7 vs OTSS = eur 1.9±0.6; P<0.001). This trend changed for the patients ventilated longer than 4 days (CTSS = eur 1.6±2.8 vs OTSS = eur 2.5±0.5; P< 0.001)

Zielmann 1992

Patient costs per day: eur 27.35

Patient costs per day: eur 9

Results based on an average of 15 suction procedures

Figuras y tablas -
Table 8. Costs
Comparison 1. Open suction system versus Closed suction system

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP) Show forest plot

11

1377

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.88 [0.70, 1.12]

1.1 Medical patients

4

182

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.88 [0.49, 1.58]

1.2 Surgical patients

2

124

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.41 [0.14, 1.25]

1.3 Other

5

1071

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.92 [0.72, 1.19]

2 Time to VAP development Show forest plot

2

34

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

1.48 [‐0.53, 3.49]

3 Mortality Show forest plot

5

1166

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.02 [0.84, 1.23]

4 Time on ventilation (in days) Show forest plot

4

1011

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.43 [‐0.97, 1.82]

5 Colonization Show forest plot

5

432

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.49 [1.09, 2.03]

6 Length of stay in ICU (in days) Show forest plot

2

182

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐1.19 [‐6.06, 3.69]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Open suction system versus Closed suction system