Search

Introduction: The influence of lung disease on the diaphragm has been poorly studied. The study aimed to evaluate the diaphragm morphology (height and thickness) in single-lung transplantation (SLTx), using computed tomography (CT), by assessing the evolution of the hemidiaphragm of the transplanted and the native side. Methods: Patients who underwent single lung transplantation in our center (Marseille, France) between January 2009 and January 2022 were retrospectively included. Thoracic or abdominal CT scans performed before and the closest to and at least 3 months after the surgery were used to measure the diaphragm crus thickness and the diaphragm dome height. Results: 31 patients mainly transplanted for emphysema or pulmonary fibrosis were included. We demonstrated a significant increase in diaphragm crus thickness on the side of the transplanted lung, with an estimated difference of + 1.25 mm, p = <0.001, at the level of the celiac artery, and + 0.90 mm, p < 0.001, at the level of the L1 vertebra while no significant difference was observed on the side of the native lung. We showed a significant reduction in the diaphragm height after SLTx on the transplanted side (-1.20 cm, p = 0.05), while no change on the native side (+0.02 cm, p = 0.88). Conclusion: After a SLTx, diaphragmatic morphology significantly changed on the transplanted lung, while remaining altered on the native lung. These results highlights that an impaired lung may have a negative impact on its diaphragm. Replacement with a healthy lung can promote the recovery of the diaphragm to its anatomical morphology, reinforcing the close relationship between these two organs., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Touchon, Bermudez, Habert, Bregeon, Thomas, Reynaud-Gaubert and Coiffard.)

Prone positioning reduces mortality in the management of intubated patients with moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. It allows improvement in oxygenation by improving ventilation/perfusion ratio mismatching.Because of its positive physiological effects, prone positioning has also been tested in non-intubated, spontaneously breathing patients, or "awake" prone positioning. This review provides an update on awake prone positioning for hypoxaemic respiratory failure, in both coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and non-COVID-19 patients. In non-COVID-19 acute respiratory failure, studies are limited to a few small nonrandomised studies and involved patients with different diseases. However, results have been appealing with regard to oxygenation improvement, especially when combined with noninvasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula.The recent COVID-19 pandemic has led to a major increase in hospitalisations for acute respiratory failure. Awake prone positioning has been used with the aim to prevent intensive care unit admission and mechanical ventilation. Prone positioning in conscious, non-intubated COVID-19 patients is used in emergency departments, medical wards and intensive care units.Several trials reported an improvement in oxygenation and respiratory rate during prone positioning, but impacts on clinical outcomes, particularly on intubation rates and survival, remain unclear. Tolerance of prolonged prone positioning is an issue. Larger controlled, randomised studies are underway to provide results concerning clinical benefit and define optimised prone positioning regimens., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: F. Touchon has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: Y. Trigui has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: E. Prud'homme has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: L. Lefebvre has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A. Giraud has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A-M. Dols has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: S. Martinez has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Bernardi has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: C. Begne has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: P. Granier has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: P. Chanez reports grants and personal fees from Almirall, Boehringer Ingelheim, ALK, GSK, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Teva and Chiesi, and grants from AMU, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: J-M. Forel has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: L. Papazian has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: X. Elharrar has nothing to disclose., (Copyright ©The authors 2021.)