Extubation strategies in neuro-intensive care unit patients and associations with outcomes: the ENIO multicentre international observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prolonged invasive ventilation is common in patients with severe brain injury. Information on optimal management of extubation and on the use of tracheostomy in these patients is scarce. International guidelines regarding the ventilator liberation and tracheostomy are currently lacking. METHODS: The aim of 'Extubation strategies in Neuro-Intensive care unit patients and associations with Outcomes' (ENIO) study is to describe current management of weaning from invasive ventilation, focusing on decisions on timing of tracheal extubation and tracheostomy in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with brain injury. We conducted a prospective, international, multi-centre observational study enrolling patients with various types of brain injury, including trauma, stroke, and subarachnoid haemorrhage, with an initial Glasgow Coma Score equal or less than 12, and a duration of invasive ventilation longer than 24 hours from ICU admission. ENIO is expected to include at least 1,500 patients worldwide. The primary endpoint of the ENIO study is extubation success in the 48 hours following endotracheal tube removal. The primary objective is to validate a score predictive of extubation success. To accomplish this, the study population will be randomly divided to a development cohort (2/3 of the included patients) and a validation cohort (the remaining 1/3). Secondary objectives are: to determine the incidence of extubation success rate according to various time-frames (within 96 hours, >96 hours after extubation); to validate (existing) prediction scores for successful extubation according to various time-frames and definitions (i.e., tracheostomy as extubation failure); and to describe the current practices of extubation and tracheostomy, and their associations. DISCUSSION: ENIO will be the largest prospective observational study of ventilator liberation and tracheostomy practices in patients with severe brain injury undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation, providing a validated predictive score of successful extubation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The ENIO study is registered in the Clinical Trials database: NCT03400904.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".