Comparison of nasotracheal versus orotracheal intubation for sedation, assisted spontaneous breathing, mobilization, and outcome in critically ill patients: an exploratory retrospective analysis

Abstract Nasotracheal intubation (NTI) may be used for long term ventilation in critically ill patients. Although tracheostomy is often favored, NTI may exhibit potential benefits. Compared to orotracheal intubation (OTI), patients receiving NTI may require less sedation and thus be more alert and w...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jörn Grensemann, Sophie Gilmour, Pischtaz Adel Tariparast, Martin Petzoldt, Stefan Kluge
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Nature Portfolio 2023-08-01
Series:Scientific Reports
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-39768-1
_version_ 1827634734288601088
author Jörn Grensemann
Sophie Gilmour
Pischtaz Adel Tariparast
Martin Petzoldt
Stefan Kluge
author_facet Jörn Grensemann
Sophie Gilmour
Pischtaz Adel Tariparast
Martin Petzoldt
Stefan Kluge
author_sort Jörn Grensemann
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Nasotracheal intubation (NTI) may be used for long term ventilation in critically ill patients. Although tracheostomy is often favored, NTI may exhibit potential benefits. Compared to orotracheal intubation (OTI), patients receiving NTI may require less sedation and thus be more alert and with less episodes of depression of respiratory drive. We aimed to study the association of NTI versus OTI with sedation, assisted breathing, mobilization, and outcome in an exploratory analysis. Retrospective data on patients intubated in the intensive care unit (ICU) and ventilated for > 48 h were retrieved from electronic records for up to ten days after intubation. Outcome measures were a Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale (RASS) of 0 or − 1, sedatives, vasopressors, assisted breathing, mobilization on the ICU mobility scale (ICU-MS), and outcome. From January 2018 to December 2020, 988 patients received OTI and 221 NTI. On day 1–3, a RASS of 0 or − 1 was attained in OTI for 4.0 ± 6.1 h/d versus 9.4 ± 8.4 h/d in NTI, p < 0.001. Propofol, sufentanil, and norepinephrine were required less frequently in NTI and doses were lower. The NTI group showed a higher proportion of spontaneous breathing from day 1 to 7 (day 1–6: p < 0.001, day 7: p = 0.002). ICU-MS scores were higher in the NTI group (d1–d9: p < 0.001, d10: p = 0.012). OTI was an independent predictor for mortality (odds ratio 1.602, 95% confidence interval 1.132–2.268, p = 0.008). No difference in the rate of tracheostomy was found. NTI was associated with less sedation, more spontaneous breathing, and a higher degree of mobilization during physiotherapy. OTI was identified as an independent predictor for mortality. Due to these findings a new prospective evaluation of NTI versus OTI should be conducted to study risks and benefits in current critical care medicine.
first_indexed 2024-03-09T15:17:27Z
format Article
id doaj.art-49316a7d660940299e33d5b554936f83
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2045-2322
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-09T15:17:27Z
publishDate 2023-08-01
publisher Nature Portfolio
record_format Article
series Scientific Reports
spelling doaj.art-49316a7d660940299e33d5b554936f832023-11-26T13:00:01ZengNature PortfolioScientific Reports2045-23222023-08-011311810.1038/s41598-023-39768-1Comparison of nasotracheal versus orotracheal intubation for sedation, assisted spontaneous breathing, mobilization, and outcome in critically ill patients: an exploratory retrospective analysisJörn Grensemann0Sophie Gilmour1Pischtaz Adel Tariparast2Martin Petzoldt3Stefan Kluge4Department of Intensive Care Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-EppendorfDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-EppendorfDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-EppendorfDepartment of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-EppendorfDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-EppendorfAbstract Nasotracheal intubation (NTI) may be used for long term ventilation in critically ill patients. Although tracheostomy is often favored, NTI may exhibit potential benefits. Compared to orotracheal intubation (OTI), patients receiving NTI may require less sedation and thus be more alert and with less episodes of depression of respiratory drive. We aimed to study the association of NTI versus OTI with sedation, assisted breathing, mobilization, and outcome in an exploratory analysis. Retrospective data on patients intubated in the intensive care unit (ICU) and ventilated for > 48 h were retrieved from electronic records for up to ten days after intubation. Outcome measures were a Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale (RASS) of 0 or − 1, sedatives, vasopressors, assisted breathing, mobilization on the ICU mobility scale (ICU-MS), and outcome. From January 2018 to December 2020, 988 patients received OTI and 221 NTI. On day 1–3, a RASS of 0 or − 1 was attained in OTI for 4.0 ± 6.1 h/d versus 9.4 ± 8.4 h/d in NTI, p < 0.001. Propofol, sufentanil, and norepinephrine were required less frequently in NTI and doses were lower. The NTI group showed a higher proportion of spontaneous breathing from day 1 to 7 (day 1–6: p < 0.001, day 7: p = 0.002). ICU-MS scores were higher in the NTI group (d1–d9: p < 0.001, d10: p = 0.012). OTI was an independent predictor for mortality (odds ratio 1.602, 95% confidence interval 1.132–2.268, p = 0.008). No difference in the rate of tracheostomy was found. NTI was associated with less sedation, more spontaneous breathing, and a higher degree of mobilization during physiotherapy. OTI was identified as an independent predictor for mortality. Due to these findings a new prospective evaluation of NTI versus OTI should be conducted to study risks and benefits in current critical care medicine.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-39768-1
spellingShingle Jörn Grensemann
Sophie Gilmour
Pischtaz Adel Tariparast
Martin Petzoldt
Stefan Kluge
Comparison of nasotracheal versus orotracheal intubation for sedation, assisted spontaneous breathing, mobilization, and outcome in critically ill patients: an exploratory retrospective analysis
Scientific Reports
title Comparison of nasotracheal versus orotracheal intubation for sedation, assisted spontaneous breathing, mobilization, and outcome in critically ill patients: an exploratory retrospective analysis
title_full Comparison of nasotracheal versus orotracheal intubation for sedation, assisted spontaneous breathing, mobilization, and outcome in critically ill patients: an exploratory retrospective analysis
title_fullStr Comparison of nasotracheal versus orotracheal intubation for sedation, assisted spontaneous breathing, mobilization, and outcome in critically ill patients: an exploratory retrospective analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of nasotracheal versus orotracheal intubation for sedation, assisted spontaneous breathing, mobilization, and outcome in critically ill patients: an exploratory retrospective analysis
title_short Comparison of nasotracheal versus orotracheal intubation for sedation, assisted spontaneous breathing, mobilization, and outcome in critically ill patients: an exploratory retrospective analysis
title_sort comparison of nasotracheal versus orotracheal intubation for sedation assisted spontaneous breathing mobilization and outcome in critically ill patients an exploratory retrospective analysis
url https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-39768-1
work_keys_str_mv AT jorngrensemann comparisonofnasotrachealversusorotrachealintubationforsedationassistedspontaneousbreathingmobilizationandoutcomeincriticallyillpatientsanexploratoryretrospectiveanalysis
AT sophiegilmour comparisonofnasotrachealversusorotrachealintubationforsedationassistedspontaneousbreathingmobilizationandoutcomeincriticallyillpatientsanexploratoryretrospectiveanalysis
AT pischtazadeltariparast comparisonofnasotrachealversusorotrachealintubationforsedationassistedspontaneousbreathingmobilizationandoutcomeincriticallyillpatientsanexploratoryretrospectiveanalysis
AT martinpetzoldt comparisonofnasotrachealversusorotrachealintubationforsedationassistedspontaneousbreathingmobilizationandoutcomeincriticallyillpatientsanexploratoryretrospectiveanalysis
AT stefankluge comparisonofnasotrachealversusorotrachealintubationforsedationassistedspontaneousbreathingmobilizationandoutcomeincriticallyillpatientsanexploratoryretrospectiveanalysis