Title: How Low, Should You Go?
题目：最低潮气量会是多少？
Author作者: Haney Mallemat

A low-tidal volume (or protective) strategy of mechanical ventilation (i.e., tidal volume of 6-8cc/kg of ideal body weight) has previously been demonstrated to be beneficial in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).
机械通气时采用低潮气量（保护性）方案（既潮气量在每公斤理想体重6－8毫升）在过去已经被证实在治疗急性呼吸窘迫综合征时是有效的。
A meta-analysis was recently performed to determine whether this strategy of mechanical ventilation is also beneficial for patients without lung injury prior to initiation of mechanical ventilation.
最近，有人做了一个文献综合分析，以确定此机械通气方案是否也可以用于未使用呼吸机前无肺损伤的病人。
Dr. Neto, et al. performed a meta-analysis of 20 studies (total of 2,822 mechanically ventilated patients) comparing a conventional ventilation strategy (average tidal volume was 10.6 cc/kg) to a protective ventilation strategy (average tidal volume was 6.4 cc/kg) of mechanical ventilation.
Neto医生等对20个文献（一共有2,822个机械通气的病人）进行了分析报告，对传统通气方案（平均潮气量为每公斤体重10.6毫升）与保护性机械通气方案（平均潮气量为每公斤体重6.4毫升）进行了比较。
The authors concluded that patients ventilated with a protective lung-strategy had reductions in:
作者指出，保护性低潮气量方案在如下几方面有减低的作用：
Mortality 死亡率
Lung injury and ARDS 肺损伤和ARDS
Atelectasis 肺不张
Pulmonary infections    肺部感染      
Length of hospital stay 住院时间

Bottom-line: This meta-analysis supports the notion that a strategy of low-tidal volume ventilation may have benefits for patients without ARDS, however prospective studies are needed.
要点：这个文献综合分析结果进一步提示，低潮气量通气可应用于没有ARDS的病人。但还需要前瞻性的临床试验进一步证实。
References 参考文献

Neto, S. et al. Association between use of lung-protective ventilation with lower tidal volumes and clinical outcomes among patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome. JAMA, Oct. 24/31; 308;16.