Effects of diaphragm thickness on rehabilitation outcomes in post-ICU patients with spinal cord and brain injury

Ultrasound assessment of diaphragmatic dysfunction in non-critically ill patients: relevant indicators and update

Diaphragm dysfunction (DD) can be classified as mild, resulting in diaphragmatic weakness, or severe, resulting in diaphragmatic paralysis. Various factors such as prolonged mechanical ventilation, surgical trauma, and inflammation can cause diaphragmatic injury, leading to negative outcomes for patients, including extended bed rest and increased risk of pulmonary complications. Therefore, it is crucial to protect and monitor diaphragmatic function. Impaired diaphragmatic function directly impacts ventilation, as the diaphragm is the primary muscle involved in inhalation. Even unilateral DD can cause ventilation abnormalities, which in turn lead to impaired gas exchange, this makes weaning from mechanical ventilation challenging and contributes to a higher incidence of ventilator-induced diaphragm dysfunction and prolonged ICU stays. However, there is insufficient research on DD in non-ICU patients, and DD can occur in all phases of the perioperative period. Furthermore, the current literature lacks standardized ultrasound indicators and diagnostic criteria for assessing diaphragmatic dysfunction. As a result, the full potential of diaphragmatic ultrasound parameters in quickly and accurately assessing diaphragmatic function and guiding diagnostic and therapeutic decisions has not been realized.

Outcomes in critically ill patients after diaphragmatic stimulation on ventilator-induced diaphragmatic dysfunction: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Mechanical ventilation (MV) is a lifesaving procedure for critically ill patients. Diaphragm activation and stimulation may counteract side effects, such as ventilator-induced diaphragm dysfunction (VIDD). The effects of stimulation on diaphragm atrophy and patient outcomes are reported in this systematic review.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Studies investigating diaphragmatic stimulation versus standard of care in critically ill patients and evaluating clinical outcomes were extracted from a Medline database last on January 23, 2023, after registration in Prospero (CRD42021259353). Selected studies included the investigation of diaphragmatic stimulation versus standard of care in critically ill patients, an evaluation of the clinical outcomes. These included muscle atrophy, VIDD, weaning failure, mortality, quality of life, ventilation time, diaphragmatic function, length of stay in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), and length of hospital stay. All articles were independently evaluated by two reviewers according to their abstract and title and, secondly, a full texts evaluation by two independent reviewers was performed. To resolve diverging evaluations, a third reviewer was consulted to reach a final decision. Data were extracted by the reviewers following the Oxford 2011 levels of evidence guidelines and summarized accordingly.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Seven studies were extracted and descriptively synthesized, since a metanalysis was not feasible. Patients undergoing diaphragm stimulation had moderate evidence of higher maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP), less atrophy, less mitochondrial respiratory dysfunction, less oxidative stress, less molecular atrophy, shorter MV time, shorter ICU length of stay, longer survival, and better SF-36 scores than control.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence of the molecular and histological benefits of diaphragmatic stimulation is limited. The results indicate positive clinical effects of diaphragm activation with a moderate level of evidence for MIP and a low level of evidence for other outcomes. Diaphragm activation could be a therapeutic solution to avoid diaphragm atrophy, accelerate weaning, shorten MV time, and counteract VIDD; however, better-powered studies are needed to increase the level of evidence.