Search

AIMS OF THE STUDY: Awake prone positioning (aPP) in non-intubated patients with severe SARS-CoV-2-related pneumonia improves oxygenation and reduces the intubation rate, but no early predictors for success or failure of the strategy have been described. The main objective of this study was to assess whether response to the first aPP in terms of PaO2/FiO2, alveolar-arterial gradient (Aa-O2), respiratory rate and PaCO2 could predict the need for intubation. As secondary objective, we assessed the effects of aPP on the same parameters for all the sessions considered together. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of consecutive SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia patients suffering from acute respiratory failure with moderate to severe hypoxaemia for whom aPP was performed for at least 45 minutes based on the prescription of the clinician in charge according to predefined criteria. Respiratory rate, blood gases and oxygenation parameters (PaO2/FiO2 and Aa-O2), before and after the first aPP were compared between patients who were subsequently intubated or not. Effects of all the aPP sessions together were also analysed. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-six patients were admitted for SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia during the study period. Among them, 50 received aPP lasting at least 45 minutes. Because 17 denied consent for data analysis and 2 were excluded because of a “do not intubate order”, 31 patients (for a total of 116 aPP sessions without any severe adverse events reported) were included. Among them, 10 (32.3%) were intubated. Mean age ± standard deviation (SD) was 60 ± 12 years. At ICU admission, respiratory rate was 26 ± 7/minute, median PaO2/FiO2 94 (interquartile range [IQR] 74–116) mm Hg and median Aa-O2 412 (IQR 286–427) mm Hg (markedly increased). Baseline characteristics did not statistically differ between patients who subsequently needed intubation or not. During the first aPP, PaO2/FiO2 increased and Aa-O2 decreased. When comparing patients who later where intubated or not, we observed, in the non intubated group only, a clinically significant decrease in median Aa-O2, from 294 (280–414) to 204 (107–281) mm Hg, corresponding to a 40% (26–56%) reduction, and a PaO2/FiO2 increase, from 103 (84–116) to 162 (138–195), corresponding to an increase of 48% (11–93%). The p value is

Background Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) is a promising alternative to invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) with a particular importance amidst the shortage of intensive care unit (ICU) beds during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to evaluate the use of NIV in Europe and factors associated with outcomes of patients treated with NIV. Methods This is a substudy of COVIP study—an international prospective observational study enrolling patients aged ≥ 70 years with confirmed COVID-19 treated in ICU. We enrolled patients in 156 ICUs across 15 European countries between March 2020 and April 2021.The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. Results Cohort included 3074 patients, most of whom were male (2197/3074, 71.4%) at the mean age of 75.7 years (SD 4.6). NIV frequency was 25.7% and varied from 1.1 to 62.0% between participating countries. Primary NIV failure, defined as need for endotracheal intubation or death within 30 days since ICU admission, occurred in 470/629 (74.7%) of patients. Factors associated with increased NIV failure risk were higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (OR 3.73, 95% CI 2.36–5.90) and Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) on admission (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.06–2.00). Patients initially treated with NIV (n = 630) lived for 1.36 fewer days (95% CI − 2.27 to − 0.46 days) compared to primary IMV group (n = 1876). Conclusions Frequency of NIV use varies across European countries. Higher severity of illness and more severe frailty were associated with a risk of NIV failure among critically ill older adults with COVID-19. Primary IMV was associated with better outcomes than primary NIV. Clinical Trial RegistrationNCT04321265, registered 19 March 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov.

Background SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) is a novel coronavirus associated with high mortality rates. The use of Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) has been recognised as a management option for severe COVID-19 (NHS, Specialty guides for patient management during the coronavirus pandemic Guidance for the role and use of non-invasive respiratory support in adult patients with coronavirus (confirmed or suspected), https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng159). We offered ward-based CPAP to COVID-19, dialysis patients not suitable for escalation to ICU. The aim of the study was to evaluate the use of CPAP for COVID-19 dialysis patients compared to non-dialysis COVID-19 patients outside of the intensive care setting. We further aimed to investigate factors associated with improved outcomes. Methods Data was collected from a single centre (Royal Preston Hospital, UK), from March to June 2020. Treatment outcomes were compared for dialysis and non-dialysis dependent patients who received CPAP with limitations on their escalation and resuscitation status. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox regression models were used to compare outcomes. The primary study outcome was 30 day mortality. Confounders including length of admission, systemic anticoagulation and ultrafiltration volumes on dialysis were also analysed. Results Over the study period, 40 dialysis patients tested positive for COVID-19, with 30 requiring hospital admission. 93% (n = 28) required supplementary oxygen and 12% (n = 9) required CPAP on the ward. These patients were compared to a serial selection of 14 non-dialysis patients treated with CPAP during the same period. Results showed a significant difference in 30 day survival rates between the two groups: 88.9% in the dialysis group vs. 21.4% in the non-dialysis group. Statistical modelling showed that anticoagulation was also an important factor and correlated with better outcomes. Conclusion This is to the best of our knowledge, the largest series of COVID-19 dialysis patients treated with CPAP in a ward-based setting. In general, dialysis dependent patients have multiple co-morbidities including cardiovascular disease and diabetes mellitus making them vulnerable to COVID-19 and not always suitable for treatment in ICU. We showed a significantly lower 30 day mortality rate with the use of CPAP in the dialysis group (11.1%) compared to the non-dialysis group (78.6%). Despite a small sample size, we believe this study provides impetus for further work clarifying the role of CPAP in treating COVID-19 dialysis dependent patients.

Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused unprecedented pressure on healthcare system globally. Lack of high-quality evidence on the respiratory management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure (C-ARF) has resulted in wide variation in clinical practice. Methods Using a Delphi process, an international panel of 39 experts developed clinical practice statements on the respiratory management of C-ARF in areas where evidence is absent or limited. Agreement was defined as achieved when > 70% experts voted for a given option on the Likert scale statement or > 80% voted for a particular option in multiple-choice questions. Stability was assessed between the two concluding rounds for each statement, using the non-parametric Chi-square (χ2) test (p Results Agreement was achieved for 27 (73%) management strategies which were then used to develop expert clinical practice statements. Experts agreed that COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is clinically similar to other forms of ARDS. The Delphi process yielded strong suggestions for use of systemic corticosteroids for critical COVID-19; awake self-proning to improve oxygenation and high flow nasal oxygen to potentially reduce tracheal intubation; non-invasive ventilation for patients with mixed hypoxemic-hypercapnic respiratory failure; tracheal intubation for poor mentation, hemodynamic instability or severe hypoxemia; closed suction systems; lung protective ventilation; prone ventilation (for 16–24 h per day) to improve oxygenation; neuromuscular blocking agents for patient-ventilator dyssynchrony; avoiding delay in extubation for the risk of reintubation; and similar timing of tracheostomy as in non-COVID-19 patients. There was no agreement on positive end expiratory pressure titration or the choice of personal protective equipment. Conclusion Using a Delphi method, an agreement among experts was reached for 27 statements from which 20 expert clinical practice statements were derived on the respiratory management of C-ARF, addressing important decisions for patient management in areas where evidence is either absent or limited. Trial registration: The study was registered with Clinical trials.gov Identifier: NCT04534569.

INTRODUCTION: Infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has recently and rapidly emerged and developed into a global pandemic. In SARS-CoV-2 patients with refractory respiratory failure, there may be a role for veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) as a life-saving rescue intervention.METHODS: This review summarizes the evidence gathered until June 12, 2020; electronic databases were screened for pertinent reports on coronavirus and V-V ECMO. Search was conducted by two independent investigators; keywords used were SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, ECMO, and extracorporeal life support (ECLS).RESULTS: Many patients with COVID-19 experience moderate symptoms and a relatively quick recovery, but others must be admitted into the intensive care unit due to severe respiratory failure and often must be mechanically ventilated. Further deterioration may require institution of extracorporeal oxygenation. Infection mechanisms may trigger "cytokine storm," an inflammatory disorder notable for multi-organ system failure; together with other metabolic and hematological changes, these amplify the changes pertinent to ECMO therapy, often exaggerating blood coagulation disorders. Thirty-two studies were found describing experiences with ECMO in the treatment of COVID-19. Of 4,912 COVID-19 patients, 2,119 (43%) developed ARDS and 2,086 (42%) were transferred to the ICU; 1,015 patients (21%) were treated with ECMO. While in an overall cohort, observed mortality was 640 (13%), the mortality within ECMO subgroups reached up to 34.6% (range 0-100%).CONCLUSION: The efficacy of ECMO treatment for COVID-19 is largely dependent on the expertise of the center in ECLS due to the interplay between the changes in hematological and inflammatory modulators associated with both COVID-19 and ECMO. In order to support gas exchange during early infection with SARS-CoV-2, ECMO has a strong rationale for the treatment of the most critically ill patients. Due to the limited resources during a global pandemic, ECMO should be reserved for only the most severe cases of COVID-19.

ObjectivesDeath or hospital readmission are frequent among patients surviving acute hypercapnic respiratory failure (AHRF). Severity scores are not valid to predict death or readmission after AHRF. Gait speed, a simple functional parameter, has been associated with hospital admission and death in the general population. The purpose of this study is to highlight an association between gait speed at hospital discharge and death or readmission among AHRF survivors.DesignSecondary analysis of a prospective cohort study.SettingsSingle Swiss tertiary hospital, pulmonary division.ParticipantsPatients were prospectively recruited to form a cohort of patients surviving AHRF in the intensive care unit between January 2012 and May 2015.Outcome measureGait speed was derived from a 6 min walking test (6MWT) before hospital discharge. All predictive variables were prospectively collected. Death or hospital readmission were recorded for 6 months. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate the association between predictive variables and death or hospital readmission.Results71 patients performed a 6MWT. 34/71 (48%) patients died or were readmitted to the hospital during the observation period. Median gait speed was 0.7 (IQR 0.3–1.0) m/s. At 6 months, 66% (25/38) of slow walkers (gait speed ConclusionThis study suggests that a simple functional parameter such as gait speed is associated with death or hospital readmission in patients surviving AHRF.Trial registration numberNCT02111876.

PURPOSE: Early lung recruitment (ELR) during high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) in combination with prophylactic surfactant use has been reported to reduce mortality, improve respiratory outcomes, and reduce the need for repeated surfactant dosing, suggesting that surfactant might be used more selectively in very low birth weight (VLBW) infants on HFOV than generally recommended. We report our first experience from such a selective early rescue use of surfactant in VLBW infants on HFOV. METHODS: After a deliberate ELR maneuver and "optimal" continuous distending pressure (CDP) finding during HFOV, used as primary ventilation mode for VLBW infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS), surfactant was only given when an unsatisfactory oxygenation response to lung recruitment (as defined by CDP x FiO(2) > 5) was observed. RESULTS: Out of 144 VLBW infants on HFOV, 84 (58.3%) received surfactant and 60 (41.7%) did not. Duration of required oxygen supplementation (37.4 +/- 44.9 vs. 46.2 +/- 35.4 days; P = 0.031) and respiratory support (i.e., n-CPAP and/or mechanical ventilation; 22.3 +/- 19.3 vs. 38.2 +/- 24.3 days; P = 0.001) was shorter for infants who did not receive surfactant than for those who did. The incidence and severity of bronchopulmonary dysplasia was similar in both groups, and there was no difference in survival rates between groups. Subgroup analysis for infants of less than 28 weeks of gestation revealed similar results. CONCLUSIONS: First intention HFOV combined with an early attempt at lung volume optimization might allow surfactants to be used more selectively (in relation to disease severity) in VLBW infants presenting with RDS at birth without negatively influencing the outcome.

Much of the common practice in paediatric mechanical ventilation is based on personal experiences and what paediatric critical care practitioners have adopted from adult and neonatal experience. This presents a barrier to planning and interpretation of clinical trials on the use of specific and targeted interventions. We aim to establish a European consensus guideline on mechanical ventilation of critically children.MethodsThe European Society for Paediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care initiated a consensus conference of international European experts in paediatric mechanical ventilation to provide recommendations using the Research and Development/University of California, Los Angeles, appropriateness method. An electronic literature search in PubMed and EMBASE was performed using a combination of medical subject heading terms and text words related to mechanical ventilation and disease-specific terms.ResultsThe Paediatric Mechanical Ventilation Consensus Conference (PEMVECC) consisted of a panel of 15 experts who developed and voted on 152 recommendations related to the following topics: (1) general recommendations, (2) monitoring, (3) targets of oxygenation and ventilation, (4) supportive measures, (5) weaning and extubation readiness, (6) normal lungs, (7) obstructive diseases, (8) restrictive diseases, (9) mixed diseases, (10) chronically ventilated patients, (11) cardiac patients and (12) lung hypoplasia syndromes. There were 142 (93.4%) recommendations with ?strong agreement?. The final iteration of the recommendations had none with equipoise or disagreement.ConclusionsThese recommendations should help to harmonise the approach to paediatric mechanical ventilation and can be proposed as a standard-of-care applicable in daily clinical practice and clinical research.; Une grande partie de la pratique courante en ventilation mécanique pédiatrique est basée sur des expériences personnelles et ce que les praticiens en soins intensifs pédiatriques ont adopté à partir de l'expérience adulte et néonatale.

Objective: To explore what design would be reasonable, acceptable, and feasible for a pediatric trial investigating the effect of low tidal volume ventilation.Design: A two-round modified Delphi approach among pediatric intensivists with a visible special interest in mechanical ventilation.Settings: None.Subjects: Pediatric intensivists.Interventions: None.Measurements and Results: In the first questionnaire "experts" classified 64 items as "important," "not so important" or "not important" (June 2010). The second questionnaire included the 29 items having been classified by more than 50% of the experts as being " important" in the first questionnaire that needed to be ranked in order of importance (August 2010). Twenty-nine of 50 (64%) experts responded to the first questionnaire, and 28 of the 29 initial responders (96.6%) to the second questionnaire. Actual expert opinion favored the following: age of study population 0 yrs to 2 yrs, expected duration of ventilation >= 48 hrs, and stratification by the severity of hypoxemia (cutoff PaO2/FIO2 1500).Conclusions: Actual expert opinion favored investigating the effect of 6 mL/kg vs. 10 mL/kg on mortality. Such a design suffers from various serious criticisms. Therefore, and in our opinion, a pediatric Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network trial is not realistic. (Pediatr Crit Care Med 2012; 13:632-638)

In Part I of this review, we have covered basic concepts regarding cardiorespiratory interactions. Here, we put this theoretical framework to practical use. We describe mechanisms underlying Kussmaul's sign and pulsus paradoxus. We review the literature on the use of respiratory variations of blood pressure to evaluate volume status. We show the possibilities of attaining the latter aim by investigating with ultrasonography how the geometry of great veins fluctuates with respiration. We provide a Guytonian analysis of the effects of PEEP on cardiac output. We terminate with some remarks on the potential of positive pressure breathing to induce acute cor pulmonale, and on the cardiovascular mechanisms that at times may underly the failure to wean a patient from the ventilator.

Crit Care Med

AIM: To investigate risk factors of adverse outcome in a cohort of very preterm children treated mainly with nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) during the neonatal course.METHODS: In Denmark, preterm children are treated with nasal CPAP as a first approach to respiratory support. A national prospective study of all infants with a birthweight below 1000 g or a gestational age below 28 wk born in 1994-1995 was initiated to evaluate this approach. Of the 269 surviving children 164 (61%) were not treated with mechanical ventilation in the neonatal period. A follow-up of the children at 5 y of age was conducted. Data from the neonatal period and the 5-y follow-up were analysed.RESULTS: In multivariate analyses including 250 children, a severely abnormal neonatal brain ultrasound scan was predictive of cerebral palsy (OR = 19.9, CI 95%: 6.1-64.8) and intellectual disability (OR = 6.2, CI 95%: 2.3-16.5). A high Clinical Risk Index for Babies (CRIB) score (OR = 2.4, CI 95%: 1.1-5.5) and chronic lung disease (OR = 2.8, CI 95%: 1.2-6.9) were predictive of intellectual disability. In univariate analyses mechanical ventilation was associated with cerebral palsy (OR=4.3, CI 95%: 1.7-10.8) and intellectual disability (OR = 2.2, CI 95%: 1.2-4.2), but the associations became insignificant in multivariate analyses including chronic lung disease and a severely abnormal ultrasound scan.CONCLUSION: The associations between neonatal risk factors and adverse outcome in our cohort were very similar to those found in other cohorts with another initial treatment of respiratory insufficiency. We found no significant adverse effects of mechanical ventilation beyond what could be explained by associations with chronic lung disease and IVH 3-4/PVL.