Impacto do sistema de aspiração traqueal aberto e fechado na incidência de pneumonia associada à ventilação mecânica: revisão de literatura

  • Lopes F
  • López M
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
44Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Pneumonia is the most common nosocominal infection in intensive care units and mechanical ventilation is a significant factor associated to its development. The objective of this study was to describe the impact of the open and closed tracheal suction systems on the incidence of ventilation-associated pneumonia. A search in the Pubmed database was performed to identify randomized controlled trials, published from 1990 to November 2008. Nine studies were included. Of the studies reviewed, seven did not disclose any significant advantages of using the closed system when compared to th e open, whereas two reported that use of the closed system increased colonization rates but not incidence of ventilation-associated pneumonia and one observed that use of the closed system did not increase colonization of the respiratory tract but reduced the spread of infection resulting in decreased sepsis rates. Only two studies found a reduction in the incidence of ventilation-associated pneumonia with use of the closed system, and one revealed a 3.5 times greater risk of developing this infection with the open system. Results suggest that the impact of the open and closed tracheal suction system is similar on development of ventilation-associated pneumonia, choice of the suction system should therefore be based on other parameters. While the closed system increases risk of colonization of the respiratory tract, but has the advantages of continuing mechanical ventilation and lessening hemodynamic impairment.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Lopes, F. M., & López, M. F. (2009). Impacto do sistema de aspiração traqueal aberto e fechado na incidência de pneumonia associada à ventilação mecânica: revisão de literatura. Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva, 21(1), 80–88. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0103-507x2009000100012

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free