Clinical trials in patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome: burn after reading

Pregnancy and Severe ARDS with COVID-19: Epidemiology, Diagnosis, Outcomes and Treatment

Pregnancy-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is fast becoming a growing and clinically relevant subgroup of ARDS amidst global outbreaks of various viral respiratory pathogens that include H1N1-influenza, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), middle east respiratory syndrome (MERS), and the most recent COVID-19 pandemic. Pregnancy is a risk factor for severe viral-induced ARDS and commonly associated with poor maternal and fetal outcomes including fetal growth-restriction, preterm birth, and spontaneous abortion. Physiologic changes of pregnancy further compounded by mechanical and immunologic alterations are theorized to impact the development of ARDS from viral pneumonia. The COVID-19 sub-phenotype of ARDS share overlapping molecular features of maternal pathogenicity of pregnancy with respect to immune-dysregulation and endothelial/microvascular injury (i.e., preeclampsia) that may in part explain a trend toward poor maternal and fetal outcomes seen with severe COVID-19 maternal infections. To date, current ARDS diagnostic criteria and treatment management fail to include and consider physiologic adaptations that are unique to maternal physiology of pregnancy and consideration of maternal-fetal interactions. Treatment focused on lung-protective ventilation strategies have been shown to improve clinical outcomes in adults with ARDS but may have adverse maternal-fetal interactions when applied in pregnancy-related ARDS. No specific pharmacotherapy has been identified to improve outcomes in pregnancy with ARDS. Adjunctive therapies aimed at immune-modulation and anti-viral treatment with COVID-19 infection during pregnancy have been reported but data in regard to its efficacy and safety is currently lacking.

Care of the Critically Injured Burn Patient

Care of the critically injured burn patient presents unique challenges to the intensivist. Certified burn centers are rare and geographically sparse, necessitating that much of the initial management of patients with severe burn injuries must happen in the pre-burn center setting.1 Severe burn injuries often lead to a wide range of complications that extend beyond the loss of skin integrity and require specialized care. As such, medical intensivists are often called upon to stabilize these critically injured patients. This focused review outlines the clinical care of these medically complex patients, including airway management, post-burn complications, volume resuscitation, nutrition, and end-of-life care.

Advances in the Pharmacological Management of Pediatric Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

INTRODUCTION

Noninvasive mechanical ventilation is the main supportive measure used in patients with pediatric ARDS (PARDS), but adjunctive pharmacological therapies (corticosteroids, inhaled nitric oxide [iNO], surfactant replacement therapy and neuromuscular blocking drugs) are also used, although limited data exists to inform of this practice.

AREAS COVERED

The authors review the current challenges in the pharmacological management of PARDS and highlight the few certainties currently available.

EXPERT OPINION

Children with PARDS must not be treated as young adults with ARDS, essentially because children's lungs differ substantially from those of adults and PARDS occurs in children differently than ARDS in adults. Pharmacological treatments available for PARDS are relatively few and, since there is great uncertainty about their effectiveness also because of the extreme heterogeneity of this syndrome, it is necessary to conduct large clinical trials using currently available definitions and considering recent pathobiological knowledge. The aim is to identify homogeneous subgroups or phenotypes of children with PARDS that may benefit from the specific pharmaceutical approach examined. It will be then necessary to link endotypes and outcomes to appropriately target therapies in future trials, but this will be possible only after it will be possible to identify the different PARDS endotypes.

Unsuccessful and Successful Clinical Trials in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Addressing Physiology-Based Gaps

The acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a severe form of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure caused by an insult to the alveolar-capillary membrane, resulting in a marked reduction of aerated alveoli, increased vascular permeability and subsequent interstitial and alveolar pulmonary edema, reduced lung compliance, increase of physiological dead space, and hypoxemia. Most ARDS patients improve their systemic oxygenation, as assessed by the ratio between arterial partial pressure of oxygen and inspired oxygen fraction, with conventional intensive care and the application of moderate-to-high levels of positive end-expiratory pressure. However, in some patients hypoxemia persisted because the lungs are markedly injured, remaining unresponsive to increasing the inspiratory fraction of oxygen and positive end-expiratory pressure. For decades, mechanical ventilation was the only standard support technique to provide acceptable oxygenation and carbon dioxide removal. Mechanical ventilation provides time for the specific therapy to reverse the disease-causing lung injury and for the recovery of the respiratory function. The adverse effects of mechanical ventilation are direct consequences of the changes in pulmonary airway pressures and intrathoracic volume changes induced by the repetitive mechanical cycles in a diseased lung. In this article, we review 14 major successful and unsuccessful randomized controlled trials conducted in patients with ARDS on a series of techniques to improve oxygenation and ventilation published since 2010. Those trials tested the effects of adjunctive therapies (neuromuscular blocking agents, prone positioning), methods for selecting the optimum positive end-expiratory pressure (after recruitment maneuvers, or guided by esophageal pressure), high-frequency oscillatory ventilation, extracorporeal oxygenation, and pharmacologic immune modulators of the pulmonary and systemic inflammatory responses in patients affected by ARDS. We will briefly comment physiology-based gaps of negative trials and highlight the possible needs to address in future clinical trials in ARDS.

Stratification for Identification of Prognostic Categories In the Acute RESpiratory Distress Syndrome (SPIRES) Score

OBJECTIVES

To develop a scoring model for stratifying patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome into risk categories (Stratification for identification of Prognostic categories In the acute RESpiratory distress syndrome score) for early prediction of death in the ICU, independent of the underlying disease and cause of death.

DESIGN

A development and validation study using clinical data from four prospective, multicenter, observational cohorts.

SETTING

A network of multidisciplinary ICUs.

PATIENTS

One-thousand three-hundred one patients with moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome managed with lung-protective ventilation.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The study followed Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis guidelines for prediction models. We performed logistic regression analysis, bootstrapping, and internal-external validation of prediction models with variables collected within 24 hours of acute respiratory distress syndrome diagnosis in 1,000 patients for model development. Primary outcome was ICU death. The Stratification for identification of Prognostic categories In the acute RESpiratory distress syndrome score was based on patient's age, number of extrapulmonary organ failures, values of end-inspiratory plateau pressure, and ratio of Pao2 to Fio2 assessed at 24 hours of acute respiratory distress syndrome diagnosis. The pooled area under the receiver operating characteristic curve across internal-external validations was 0.860 (95% CI, 0.831-0.890). External validation in a new cohort of 301 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients confirmed the accuracy and robustness of the scoring model (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.870; 95% CI, 0.829-0.911). The Stratification for identification of Prognostic categories In the acute RESpiratory distress syndrome score stratified patients in three distinct prognostic classes and achieved better prediction of ICU death than ratio of Pao2 to Fio2 at acute respiratory distress syndrome onset or at 24 hours, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, or Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scale.

CONCLUSIONS

The Stratification for identification of Prognostic categories In the acute RESpiratory distress syndrome score represents a novel strategy for early stratification of acute respiratory distress syndrome patients into prognostic categories and for selecting patients for therapeutic trials.

Precision Medicine and Heterogeneity of Treatment Effect in Therapies for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a clinically heterogenous syndrome, rather than a distinct disease. This heterogeneity at least partially explains the difficulty in studying treatments for these patients and contributes to the numerous trials of therapies for the syndrome that have not shown benefit. Recent studies have identified different subphenotypes within the heterogenous patient population. These different subphenotypes likely have variable clinical responses to specific therapies, a concept known as heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE). Recognizing different subphenotypes and HTE has important implications for the clinical management of patients with ARDS. In this review, we will present studies that have identified different subphenotypes and discuss how they can modify the effects of therapies evaluated in trials that are commonly considered to have demonstrated no overall benefit in patients with ARDS.

Pharmacological management of adult patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome

INTRODUCTION

There is still no definite drug for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) that is capable of reducing either short-term or long-term mortality. Therefore, great efforts are being made to identify a pharmacological approach that can be really effective.

AREAS COVERED

This review focuses on current challenges and future directions in the pharmacological management of ARDS, regardless of anti-infective treatments. The authors have excluded small randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with less than 60 patients because those studies do not have statistical power for outcome data, and also anecdotal trials but have considered the last meta-analysis on any drug.

EXPERT OPINION

There has been substantial progress in our knowledge of ARDS over the past two decades and many drugs have been used in its treatment. Nevertheless, effective targeted pharmacological treatments for ARDS are still lacking. The likely reason why a pharmacological approach is beneficial for some patients, but harmful for others is that ARDS is an extremely heterogeneous syndrome. To overcome this issue, a precision approach for ARDS, whereby therapies are specifically targeted to patients most likely to benefit, has been proposed. At present, however, the application of this approach seems to be a difficult task.

A Prognostic Enrichment Strategy for Selection of Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Clinical Trials

OBJECTIVES

Incomplete or ambiguous evidence for identifying high-risk patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome for enrollment into randomized controlled trials has come at the cost of an unreasonable number of negative trials. We examined a set of selected variables early in acute respiratory distress syndrome to determine accurate prognostic predictors for selecting high-risk patients for randomized controlled trials.

DESIGN

A training and testing study using a secondary analysis of data from four prospective, multicenter, observational studies.

SETTING

A network of multidisciplinary ICUs.

PATIENTS

We studied 1,200 patients with moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome managed with lung-protective ventilation.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We evaluated different thresholds for patient's age, PaO2/FIO2, plateau pressure, and number of extrapulmonary organ failures to predict ICU outcome at 24 hours of acute respiratory distress syndrome diagnosis. We generated 1,000 random scenarios as training (n = 900, 75% of population) and testing (n = 300, 25% of population) datasets and averaged the logistic coefficients for each scenario. Thresholds for age (< 50, 50-70, > 70 yr), PaO2/FIO2 (≤ 100, 101-150, > 150 mm Hg), plateau pressure (< 29, 29-30, > 30 cm H2O), and number of extrapulmonary organ failure (< 2, 2, > 2) stratified accurately acute respiratory distress syndrome patients into categories of risk. The model that included all four variables proved best to identify patients with the highest or lowest risk of death (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.84-0.88). Decision tree analyses confirmed the accuracy and robustness of this enrichment model.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined thresholds for patient's age, PaO2/FIO2, plateau pressure, and extrapulmonary organ failure provides prognostic enrichment accuracy for stratifying and selecting acute respiratory distress syndrome patients for randomized controlled trials.

Is Overall Mortality the Right Composite Endpoint in Clinical Trials of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome?

OBJECTIVES

Overall mortality in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome is a composite endpoint because it includes death from multiple causes. In most acute respiratory distress syndrome trials, it is unknown whether reported deaths are due to acute respiratory distress syndrome or the underlying disease, unrelated to the specific intervention tested. We investigated the causes of death after contracting acute respiratory distress syndrome in a large cohort.

DESIGN

A secondary analysis from three prospective, multicenter, observational studies.

SETTING

A network of multidisciplinary ICUs.

PATIENTS

We studied 778 patients with moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome treated with lung-protective ventilation.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We examined death in the ICU from individual causes. Overall ICU mortality was 38.8% (95% CI, 35.4-42.3). Causes of acute respiratory distress syndrome modified the risk of death. Twenty-three percent of deaths occurred from refractory hypoxemia due to nonresolving acute respiratory distress syndrome. Most patients died from causes unrelated to acute respiratory distress syndrome: 48.7% of nonsurvivors died from multisystem organ failure, and cancer or brain injury was involved in 37.1% of deaths. When quantifying the true burden of acute respiratory distress syndrome outcome, we identified 506 patients (65.0%) with one or more exclusion criteria for enrollment into current interventional trials. Overall ICU mortality of the "trial cohort" (21.3%) was markedly lower than the parent cohort (relative risk, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.43-0.70; p < 0.000001).

CONCLUSIONS

Most deaths in acute respiratory distress syndrome patients are not directly related to lung damage but to extrapulmonary multisystem organ failure. It would be challenging to prove that specific lung-directed therapies have an effect on overall survival.

A modified acute respiratory distress syndrome prediction score: a multicenter cohort study in China

Background

Early recognition of the risks of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and prevention of the development of ARDS may be more effective in improving patient outcomes. We performed the present study to determine the ARDS risk factors in a Chinese population and validate a score to predict the development of ARDS.

Methods

This was an observational multicenter cohort study performed in 13 tertiary hospitals in China. Patients admitted into participating intensive care units (ICUs) from January 1 to January 31, 2012, and from January 1 to January 10, 2013, were enrolled in a retrospective derivation cohort and a prospective validation cohort, respectively. In the derivation cohort, the potential risk factors of ARDS were collected. The confirmed risk factors were determined with univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses, and then the modified ARDS prediction score (MAPS) was established. We prospectively enrolled patients to verify the accuracy of MAPS.

Results

A total of 479 and 198 patients were enrolled into the retrospective derivation cohort and the prospective validation cohort, respectively. A total of 93 (19.4%) patients developed ARDS in the derivation cohort. Acute pancreatitis, pneumonia, hypoalbuminemia, acidosis, and high respiratory rate were the risk factors for ARDS. The MAPS discriminated patients who developed ARDS from those who did not, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.809 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.758-0.859, P<0.001]. In the prospective validation cohort, performance of the MAPS was similar to the retrospective derivation cohort, with an AUC of 0.792 (95% CI, 0.717-0.867, P<0.001). The lung injury prediction score (LIPS) showed a predicted value of an AUC of 0.770 (95% CI, 0.728-0.812, P<0.001) in our patients, which was significantly lower than our score (P<0.046).

Conclusions

The MAPS based on risk factors could help the clinician to predict patients who will develop ARDS.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01666834.

Managing Persistent Hypoxemia: what is new?

Mechanical ventilation is the standard life-support technique for patients with severe acute respiratory failure. However, some patients develop persistent and refractory hypoxemia because their lungs are so severely damaged that they are unable to respond to the application of high inspired oxygen concentration and high levels of positive end-expiratory pressure. In this article, we review current knowledge on managing persistent hypoxemia in patients with injured lungs.

ECMO in major burn patients: feasibility and considerations when multiple modes of mechanical ventilation fail

BACKGROUND

We report two cases of acute respiratory distress syndrome in burn patients who were successfully managed with good outcomes with extra corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) after failing multiple conventional modes of ventilation, and review the relevant literature.

CASE PRESENTATION

The two patients were a 39-year-old male and 53-year-old male with modified Baux Scores of 79 and 78, respectively, with no known inhalation injury. After the initial modified Parkland-based fluid resuscitation and partial escharotomy, both patients developed worsening hypoxemia and acute respiratory distress syndrome. The hypoxemia continued to worsen on multiple modes of ventilation including volume control, pressure regulated volume control, pressure control, airway pressure release ventilation and volumetric diffusive ventilation. In both cases, the PaO₂ ≤ 50 mm Hg on a FiO₂ 100% during the trial of mechanical ventilation. The deterioration was rapid (<12 h since onset of worsening oxygenation) in both cases. A decision was made to trial the patients on ECMO. Veno-Venous ECMO (V-V ECMO) was successfully initiated following cannulation-under transesophgeal echo guidance-with the dual lumen Avalon® (Maquet, NJ, USA) cannula. ECMO support was maintained for 4 and 24 days, respectively. Both patients were successfully weaned off ECMO and were discharged to rehabilitation following their complex hospital course.

CONCLUSION

Early ECMO for isolated respiratory failure in the setting on maintained hemodynamics resulted in a positive outcome in our two burn patients suffered from acute respiratory distress syndrome.

A Quantile Analysis of Plateau and Driving Pressures: Effects on Mortality in Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Receiving Lung-Protective Ventilation

OBJECTIVES

The driving pressure (plateau pressure minus positive end-expiratory pressure) has been suggested as the major determinant for the beneficial effects of lung-protective ventilation. We tested whether driving pressure was superior to the variables that define it in predicting outcome in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome.

DESIGN

A secondary analysis of existing data from previously reported observational studies.

SETTING

A network of ICUs.

PATIENTS

We studied 778 patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We assessed the risk of hospital death based on quantiles of tidal volume, positive end-expiratory pressure, plateau pressure, and driving pressure evaluated at 24 hours after acute respiratory distress syndrome diagnosis while ventilated with standardized lung-protective ventilation. We derived our model using individual data from 478 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients and assessed its replicability in a separate cohort of 300 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients. Tidal volume and positive end-expiratory pressure had no impact on mortality. We identified a plateau pressure cut-off value of 29 cm H2O, above which an ordinal increment was accompanied by an increment of risk of death. We identified a driving pressure cut-off value of 19 cm H2O where an ordinal increment was accompanied by an increment of risk of death. When we cross tabulated patients with plateau pressure less than 30 and plateau pressure greater than or equal to 30 with those with driving pressure less than 19 and driving pressure greater than or equal to 19, plateau pressure provided a slightly better prediction of outcome than driving pressure in both the derivation and validation cohorts (p < 0.0000001).

CONCLUSIONS

Plateau pressure was slightly better than driving pressure in predicting hospital death in patients managed with lung-protective ventilation evaluated on standardized ventilator settings 24 hours after acute respiratory distress syndrome onset.

Current incidence and outcome of the acute respiratory distress syndrome

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article discusses recently published articles reporting the incidence and outcome of patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). This is a difficult task since there is a marked variability regarding the methodology of the few, large epidemiological, and observational studies on ARDS.

RECENT FINDINGS

The review will mainly focus on publications from the past 18 months. We have reviewed new epidemiological studies reporting population-based incidence of ARDS. Also, we have reviewed the data on survival reported in observational and randomized controlled trials, discussed how the current ARDS definition modifies the true incidence of ARDS, and briefly mentioned recent approaches that appear to improve ARDS outcome.

SUMMARY

On the basis of current evidence, it seems that the incidence and overall hospital mortality of ARDS has not changed substantially in the last decade. Independent of the definition used for identification of ARDS patients, reported population-based incidence of ARDS is an order of magnitude lower in Europe than in the USA. Current hospital mortality of combined moderate and severe ARDS reported in observational studies is greater than 40%.

Critical care of burn patients. New approaches to old problems

Recent publications on treatment options in critically ill patients change beliefs and clinical behaviors. Many dogmas, which the modern management of critical illness relies on, have been questioned. These publications (consensus articles, reviews, meta-analysis and original papers) concern some fundamental issues of critical care: interventions in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), hemodynamic monitoring, glucose control and nutritional support and revise our views on many key points of critical care of burn patients.

Diffuse alveolar damage associated mortality in selected acute respiratory distress syndrome patients with open lung biopsy

Introduction

Diffuse alveolar damage (DAD) is the pathological hallmark of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), however, the presence of DAD in the clinical criteria of ARDS patients by Berlin definition is little known. This study is designed to investigate the role of DAD in ARDS patients who underwent open lung biopsy.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed all ARDS patients who met the Berlin definition and underwent open lung biopsy from January 1999 to January 2014 in a referred medical center. DAD is characterized by hyaline membrane formation, lung edema, inflammation, hemorrhage and alveolar epithelial cell injury. Clinical data including baseline characteristics, severity of ARDS, clinical and pathological diagnoses, and survival outcomes were analyzed.

Results

A total of 1838 patients with ARDS were identified and open lung biopsies were performed on 101 patients (5.5 %) during the study period. Of these 101 patients, the severity of ARDS on diagnosis was mild of 16.8 %, moderate of 56.5 % and severe of 26.7 %. The hospital mortality rate was not significant difference between the three groups (64.7 % vs 61.4 % vs 55.6 %, p = 0.81). Of the 101 clinical ARDS patients with open lung biopsies, 56.4 % (57/101) patients had DAD according to biopsy results. The proportion of DAD were 76.5 % (13/17) in mild, 56.1 % (32/57) in moderate and 44.4 % (12/27) in severe ARDS and there is no significant difference between the three groups (p = 0.113). Pathological findings of DAD patients had a higher hospital mortality rate than non-DAD patients (71.9 % vs 45.5 %, p = 0.007). Pathological findings of DAD (odds ratio: 3.554, 95 % CI, 1.385–9.12; p = 0.008) and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score on the biopsy day (odds ratio: 1.424, 95 % CI, 1.187–1.707; p<0.001) were significantly and independently associated with hospital mortality. The baseline demographics and clinical characteristics were not significantly different between DAD and non-DAD patients.

Conclusions

The correlation of pathological findings of DAD and ARDS diagnosed by Berlin definition is modest. A pathological finding of DAD in ARDS patients is associated with hospital mortality and there are no clinical characteristics that could identify DAD patients before open lung biopsy.

Assessment of PaO₂/FiO₂ for stratification of patients with moderate and severe acute respiratory distress syndrome

OBJECTIVES

A recent update of the definition of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) proposed an empirical classification based on ratio of arterial partial pressure of oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO₂/FiO₂) at ARDS onset. Since the proposal did not mandate PaO₂/FiO₂ calculation under standardised ventilator settings (SVS), we hypothesised that a stratification based on baseline PaO₂/FiOv would not provide accurate assessment of lung injury severity.

DESIGN

A prospective, multicentre, observational study.

SETTING

A network of teaching hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

478 patients with eligible criteria for moderate (100<PaO₂/FiO₂≤200) and severe (PaO₂/FiO₂≤100) ARDS and followed until hospital discharge.

INTERVENTIONS

We examined physiological and ventilator parameters in association with the PaO₂/FiO₂ at ARDS onset, after 24 h of usual care and at 24 h under a SVS. At 24 h, patients were reclassified as severe, moderate, mild (200<PaO₂/FiO₂≤300) ARDS and non-ARDS (PaO₂/FiO₂>300).

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Group severity and hospital mortality.

RESULTS

At ARDS onset, 173 patients had a PaO₂/FiO₂≤100 but only 38.7% met criteria for severe ARDS at 24 h under SVS. When assessed under SVS, 61.3% of patients with severe ARDS were reclassified as moderate, mild and non-ARDS, while lung severity and hospital mortality changed markedly with every PaO₂/FiO₂ category (p<0.000001). Our model of risk stratification outperformed the stratification using baseline PaO₂/FiO₂ and non-standardised PaO₂/FiO₂ at 24 h, when analysed by the predictive receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve: area under the ROC curve for stratification at baseline was 0.583 (95% CI 0.525 to 0.636), 0.605 (95% CI 0.552 to 0.658) at 24 h without SVS and 0.693 (95% CI 0.645 to 0.742) at 24 h under SVS (p<0.000001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support the need for patient assessment under SVS at 24 h after ARDS onset to assess disease severity, and have implications for the diagnosis and management of ARDS patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

NCT00435110 and NCT00736892.

Prediction model for critically ill patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a major cause respiratory failure in intensive care unit (ICU). Early recognition of patients at high risk of death is of vital importance in managing them. The aim of the study was to establish a prediction model by using variables that were readily available in routine clinical practice.

METHODS

The study was a secondary analysis of data obtained from the NHLBI Biologic Specimen and Data Repository Information Coordinating Center. Patients were enrolled between August 2007 and July 2008 from 33 hospitals. Demographics and laboratory findings were extracted from dataset. Univariate analyses were performed to screen variables with p<0.3. Then these variables were subject to automatic stepwise forward selection with significance level of 0.1. Interaction terms and fractional polynomials were examined for variables in the main effect model. Multiple imputations and bootstraps procedures were used to obtain estimations of coefficients with better external validation. Overall model fit and logistic regression diagnostics were explored.

MAIN RESULT

A total of 282 ARDS patients were included for model development. The final model included eight variables without interaction terms and non-linear functions. Because the variable coefficients changed substantially after exclusion of most poorly fitted and influential subjects, we estimated the coefficient after exclusion of these outliers. The equation for the fitted model was: g(Χ)=0.06×age(in years)+2.23(if on vasopressor)+1.37×potassium (mmol/l)-0.007×platelet count (×109)+0.03×heart rate (/min)-0.29×Hb(g/dl)-0.67×T(°C)+0.01×PaO_2+13, and the probability of death π(Χ)=eg(Χ)/(1+eg(Χ)).

CONCLUSION

The study established a prediction model for ARDS patients requiring mechanical ventilation. The model was examined with rigorous methodology and can be used for risk stratification in ARDS patients.