Liberation from Invasive Mechanical Ventilation with Continued Receipt of Vasopressor Infusions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rationale Weaning protocols for discontinuation of invasive mechanical ventilation often mandate resolution of shock. Whether extubation while receiving vasopressors is associated with harm is uncertain. Objectives To examine whether extubation while still receiving vasopressors is associated with worse outcomes. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study of adults in Calgary ICUs who received vasopressors with invasive mechanical ventilation and an extubation attempt. The primary exposure was continued vasopressor use at extubation. The primary outcome was reintubation within 96 hours. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality and ICU/hospital length of stay (LOS). We assessed associations of vasopressor use at extubation with outcomes using multivariable competing-risk (reintubation/LOS) and Cox proportional-hazards (mortality) models. Measurements and Main Results Of 6,140 patients who received invasive mechanical ventilation while on vasopressors, 721 (11.7%) were extubated while receiving vasopressors, and 5,419 (88.3%) after discontinuation. Extubation on vasopressors was not, in aggregate, significantly associated with an increased hazard of reintubation (subhazard ratio [SHR], 1.81 [95% confidence interval, 0.91–3.61]; P = 0.09). Both mortality (hazard ratio, 1.22 [1.02–1.47]; P = 0.03) and time to hospital discharge (SHR for remaining hospitalized, 0.78 [0.68–0.91]; P < 0.01) were increased. Extubation on high-dose vasopressors (>0.1 μg/kg/min) was associated with a greater hazard of reintubation (SHR, 2.25 [1.01–4.98]; P = 0.046) compared with extubation after vasopressor discontinuation. Meanwhile, extubation on low-dose vasopressors (⩽0.1 μg/kg/min) was associated with a lower mortality (hazard ratio, 0.69 [0.51–0.91]; P = 0.01) and a shorter ICU LOS (SHR, 1.34 [1.09–1.65]; P = 0.01), but no difference in reintubation or hospital LOS as compared with those weaned off vasopressors. Conclusions Extubation while receiving high-dose but not low-dose vasopressors was associated with an increased risk of reintubation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".