TABLE 3.

Summary of randomized studies on subglottic suctioning

Author (reference), study design	Description of groups and interventions	Outcome measures	Summary of main results
Smulders et al (31), RCT	Sample: Patients in ICU requiring MV (n=150) Group 1 (n=75): Suction through conventional ETT Group 2 (n=75): ETT with intermittent subglottic suction	Incidence of VAP Duration of MV LOS (in ICU) LOS (in hospital) Mortality in ICU	Lower incidence of VAP in group 2 (P=0.014) No significant difference between groups for other outcome measures
Girou et al (32), RCT	Sample: Patients in MICU requiring MV (n=18) Group 1 (n=10): Suctioning with standard ETT and placed supine Group 2 (n=8): Subglottic suctioning through ETT and placed in a semirecumbent (30°) position	Bacterial counts Time course of colonization	No significant difference in bacterial counts or time course between groups.

ETT Endotracheal tube; ICU Intensive care unit; LOS Length of stay; MICU Medical intensive care unit; MV Mechanical ventilation; RCT Randomized controlled trial