Purpose: To investigate whether COVID-19-ARDS differs from all-cause ARDS. Methods: Thirty-two consecutive, mechanically ventilated COVID-19-ARDS patients were compared to two historical ARDS sub-populations 1:1 matched for PaO 2 /FiO 2 or for compliance of the respiratory system. Gas exchange, hemodynamics and respiratory mechanics were recorded at 5 and 15 cmH 2 O PEEP. CT scan variables were measured at 5 cmH 2 O PEEP. Results: Anthropometric characteristics were similar in COVID-19-ARDS, PaO 2 /FiO 2-matched-ARDS and Compliance-matched-ARDS. The PaO 2 /FiO 2-matched-ARDS and COVID-19-ARDS populations (both with PaO 2 /FiO 2 106 ± 59 mmHg) had different respiratory system compliances (Crs) (39 ± 11 vs 49.9 ± 15.4 ml/cmH 2 O, p = 0.03). The Compliance-matched-ARDS and COVID-19-ARDS had similar Crs (50.1 ± 15.7 and 49.9 ± 15.4 ml/cmH 2 O, respectively) but significantly lower PaO 2 /FiO 2 for the same Crs (160 ± 62 vs 106.5 ± 59.6 mmHg, p < 0.001). The three populations had similar lung weights but COVID-19-ARDS had significantly higher lung gas volume (PaO 2 /FiO 2-matched-ARDS 930 ± 644 ml, COVID-19-ARDS 1670 ± 791 ml and Compliance-matched-ARDS 1301 ± 627 ml, p < 0.05). The venous admixture was significantly related to the non-aerated tissue in PaO 2 /FiO 2-matched-ARDS and Compliance-matched-ARDS (p < 0.001) but unrelated in COVID-19-ARDS (p = 0.75), suggesting that hypoxemia was not only due to the extent of non-aerated tissue. Increasing PEEP from 5 to 15 cmH 2 O improved oxygenation in all groups. However, while lung mechanics and dead space improved in PaO 2 /FiO 2-matched-ARDS, suggesting recruitment as primary mechanism, they remained unmodified or worsened in COVID-19-ARDS and Compliance-matched-ARDS, suggesting lower recruitment potential and/or blood flow redistribution. Conclusions: COVID-19-ARDS is a subset of ARDS characterized overall by higher compliance and lung gas volume for a given PaO 2 /FiO 2 , at least when considered within the timeframe of our study.
IntroductionPressure-support ventilation, is widely used in critically ill patients; however, the relative contribution of patient’s effort during assisted breathing is difficult to measure in clinical conditions. Aim of the present study was to evaluate the performance of ultrasonographic indices of diaphragm contractile activity (respiratory excursion and thickening) in comparison to traditional indices of inspiratory muscle effort during assisted mechanical ventilation.MethodConsecutive patients admitted to the ICU after major elective surgery who met criteria for a spontaneous breathing trial with pressure support ventilation were enrolled. Patients with airflow obstruction or after thoracic/gastric/esophageal surgery were excluded. Variable levels of inspiratory muscle effort were achieved by delivery of different levels of ventilatory assistance by random application of pressure support (0, 5 and 15 cmH2O). The right hemidiaphragm was evaluated by B- and M-mode ultrasonography to record respiratory excursion and thickening. Airway, gastric and oesophageal pressures, and airflow were recorded to calculate indices of respiratory effort (diaphragm and esophageal pressure–time product).Results25 patients were enrolled. With increasing levels of pressure support, parallel reductions were found between diaphragm thickening and both diaphragm and esophageal pressure–time product (respectively, R = 0.701, p < 0.001 and R = 0.801, p < 0.001) during tidal breathing. No correlation was found between either diaphragm or esophageal pressure–time product and diaphragm excursion (respectively, R = −0.081, p = 0.506 and R = 0.003, p = 0.981), nor was diaphragm excursion correlated to diaphragm thickening (R = 0.093, p = 0.450) during tidal breathing.ConclusionsIn patients undergoing in assisted mechanical ventilation, diaphragm thickening is a reliable indicator of respiratory effort, whereas diaphragm excursion should not be used to quantitatively assess diaphragm contractile activity.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-015-0894-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Background: In ARDS patients, mechanical ventilation should minimize ventilator-induced lung injury. The mechanical power which is the energy per unit time released to the respiratory system according to the applied tidal volume, PEEP, respiratory rate, and flow should reflect the ventilator-induced lung injury. However, similar levels of mechanical power applied in different lung sizes could be associated to different effects. The aim of this study was to assess the role both of the mechanical power and of the transpulmonary mechanical power, normalized to predicted body weight, respiratory system compliance, lung volume, and amount of aerated tissue on intensive care mortality. Methods: Retrospective analysis of ARDS patients previously enrolled in seven published studies. All patients were sedated, paralyzed, and mechanically ventilated. After 20 min from a recruitment maneuver, partitioned respiratory mechanics measurements and blood gas analyses were performed with a PEEP of 5 cmH 2 O while the remaining setting was maintained unchanged from the baseline. A whole lung CT scan at 5 cmH 2 O of PEEP was performed to estimate the lung gas volume and the amount of well-inflated tissue. Univariate and multivariable Poisson regression models with robust standard error were used to calculate risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals of ICU mortality. Results: Two hundred twenty-two ARDS patients were included; 88 (40%) died in ICU. Mechanical power was not different between survivors and non-survivors 14.97 [11.51-18.44] vs. 15.46 [12.33-21.45] J/min and did not affect intensive care mortality. The multivariable robust regression models showed that the mechanical power normalized to well-inflated tissue (RR 2.69 [95% CI 1.10-6.56], p = 0.029) and the mechanical power normalized to respiratory system compliance (RR 1.79 [95% CI 1.16-2.76], p = 0.008) were independently associated with intensive care mortality after adjusting for age, SAPS II, and ARDS severity. Also, transpulmonary mechanical power normalized to respiratory system compliance and to well-inflated tissue significantly increased intensive care mortality (RR 1.74 [1.11-2.70], p = 0.015; RR 3.01 [1.15-7.91], p = 0.025).
Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is characterized by the acute onset of pulmonary edema of non-cardiogenic origin, along with bilateral pulmonary infiltrates and reduction in respiratory system compliance. The hallmark of the syndrome is refractory hypoxemia. Despite its first description dates back in the late 1970s, a new definition has recently been proposed. However, the definition remains based on clinical characteristic. In the present review, the diagnostic workup and the pathophysiology of the syndrome will be presented. Therapeutic approaches to ARDS, including lung protective ventilation, prone positioning, neuromuscular blockade, inhaled vasodilators, corticosteroids and recruitment manoeuvres will be reviewed. We will underline how a holistic framework of respiratory and hemodynamic support should be provided to patients with ARDS, aiming to ensure adequate gas exchange by promoting lung recruitment while minimizing the risk of ventilator-induced lung injury. To do so, lung recruitability should be considered, as well as the avoidance of lung overstress by monitoring transpulmonary pressure or airway driving pressure. In the most severe cases, neuromuscular blockade, prone positioning, and extra-corporeal life support (alone or in combination) should be taken into account.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.