The definition of ARDS revisited: 20 years later

Consensus statements on the utility of defining ARDS and the utility of past and current definitions of ARDS-protocol for a Delphi study

INTRODUCTION

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), marked by acute hypoxemia and bilateral pulmonary infiltrates, has been defined in multiple ways since its first description. This Delphi study aims to collect global opinions on the conceptual framework of ARDS, assess the usefulness of components within current and past definitions and investigate the role of subphenotyping. The varied expertise of the panel will provide valuable insights for refining future ARDS definitions and improving clinical management.

METHODS

A diverse panel of 35-40 experts will be selected based on predefined criteria. Multiple choice questions (MCQs) or 7-point Likert-scale statements will be used in the iterative Delphi rounds to achieve consensus on key aspects related to the utility of definitions and subphenotyping. The Delphi rounds will be continued until a stable agreement or disagreement is achieved for all statements.

ANALYSIS

Consensus will be considered as reached when a choice in MCQs or Likert-scale statement achieved ≥80% of votes for agreement or disagreement. The stability will be checked by non-parametric χ2 tests or Kruskal Wallis test starting from the second round of Delphi process. A p-value ≥0.05 will be used to define stability.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study will be conducted in full concordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and will be reported according to CREDES guidance. This study has been granted an ethical approval waiver by the NMC Healthcare Regional Research Ethics Committee, Dubai (NMCHC/CR/DXB/REC/APP/002), owing to the nature of the research. Informed consent will be obtained from all panellists before the start of the Delphi process. The study will be published in a peer-review journal with the authorship agreed as per ICMJE requirements.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT06159465.

Alveolar Type II Cells or Mesenchymal Stem Cells: Comparison of Two Different Cell Therapies for the Treatment of Acute Lung Injury in Rats

The use of cell therapies has recently increased for the treatment of pulmonary diseases. Mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (MSCs) and alveolar type II cells (ATII) are the main cell-based therapies used for the treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Many pre-clinical studies have shown that both therapies generate positive outcomes; however, the differences in the efficiency of MSCs or ATII for reducing lung damage remains to be studied. We compared the potential of both cell therapies, administering them using the same route and dose and equal time points in a sustained acute lung injury (ALI) model. We found that the MSCs and ATII cells have similar therapeutic effects when we tested them in a hydrochloric acid and lipopolysaccharide (HCl-LPS) two-hit ALI model. Both therapies were able to reduce proinflammatory cytokines, decrease neutrophil infiltration, reduce permeability, and moderate hemorrhage and interstitial edema. Although MSCs and ATII cells have been described as targeting different cellular and molecular mechanisms, our data indicates that both cell therapies are successful for the treatment of ALI, with similar beneficial results. Understanding direct cell crosstalk and the factors released from each cell will open the door to more accurate drugs being able to target specific pathways and offer new curative options for ARDS.

The rationale of using mesenchymal stem cells in patients with COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome: What to expect

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2)‐caused coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic has become a global health crisis with an extremely rapid progress resulting in thousands of patients who may develop acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) requiring intensive care unit (ICU) treatment. So far, no specific antiviral therapeutic agent has been demonstrated to be effective for COVID‐19; therefore, the clinical management is largely supportive and depends on the patients' immune response leading to a cytokine storm followed by lung edema, dysfunction of air exchange, and ARDS, which could lead to multiorgan failure and death. Given that human mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) from various tissue sources have revealed successful clinical outcomes in many immunocompromised disorders by inhibiting the overactivation of the immune system and promoting endogenous repair by improving the microenvironment, there is a growing demand for MSC infusions in patients with COVID‐19‐related ARDS in the ICU. In this review, we have documented the rationale and possible outcomes of compassionate use of MSCs, particularly in patients with SARS‐CoV‐2 infections, toward proving or disproving the efficacy of this approach in the near future. Many centers have registered and approved, and some already started, single‐case or phase I/II trials primarily aiming to rescue their critical patients when no other therapeutic approach responds. On the other hand, it is also very important to mention that there is a good deal of concern about clinics offering unproven stem cell treatments for COVID‐19. The reviewers and oversight bodies will be looking for a balanced but critical appraisal of current trials.

Mesenchymal stem/stromal cells: the therapeutic effects in animal models of acute pulmonary diseases

The pulmonary diseases are one of the most important causes of death in the world. The successful therapies in the field of lung diseases are very limited and the medical treatments available are ineffective in many of the lung diseases. Many studies have evaluated the new therapies in the acute pulmonary diseases, and the transplantation of mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (MSCs), which is a branch of cell therapy, has a special place among the new medical techniques. The MSCs are present throughout the body and are thought to play a role in tissue regeneration and inflammation control. In the event of injury, the local MSCs traverse the shortest possible distance from the tissue or blood vessels to reach the affected site. But, there are few undifferentiated cells in the tissues. The exogenous MSCs are used to immunity modify or regenerative treatments in preclinical models of acute pulmonary diseases. Several studies have shown the positive effects of MSCs replacement in the acute lung disorders. The effection mechanism of the MSCs include the differentiation ability and the secretion of paracrine agents such as the anti-inflammatory mediators. Many studies suggest that this treatment method is safe and is probably to be widely used in future clinical trials. This review will describe the therapeutic effects of the MSCs in the experimental models of the acute pulmonary diseases for use as a method of treatment in clinical trials in future.

Intrapulmonary autologous transplant of bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells improves lipopolysaccharide-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome in rabbit

Background

Lung diseases such as acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) have a high incidence worldwide. The current drug therapies for ARDS have supportive effects, making them inefficient. New methods such as stromal cell therapy are needed for this problem.

Methods

This research was performed with ten New Zealand rabbits in two groups. Bone marrow aspiration was performed on the treated group, and mesenchymal stem cells were isolated and cultured. The experimental model of ARDS was induced using LPS from Escherichia coli strain O55:B5. Then, 10¹⁰ bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (BM-MSCs) were autologously transplanted intrapulmonary in the treatment group, and 1–2 ml of PBS in the control group. The clinical signs, computed tomographic (CT) scans, echocardiography, blood gas analysis, complete blood count, and cytokine levels were measured before and at 3, 6, 12, 24, 48, 72, and 168 h after BM-MSC transplant. Finally, the rabbits were killed, and histopathological examination was performed.

Results

The results showed that BM-MSCs decreased the severity of clinical symptoms, the number of white blood cells and heterophils in the blood, the total cell count, and number of heterophils and macrophages in bronchoalveolar lavage, and balanced the values of arterial blood gases (increase in partial pressure of oxygen and O₂ saturation and decrease in the partial pressure of carbon dioxide). They also downregulated the tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α and interleukin (IL)-6 concentrations and increased the IL-10 concentrations at different times compared with time 0 and in the control group, significantly. In the CT scan, a significant decrease in the Hounsfield units and total lung volume was found by echocardiography, and in comparing the two groups, a significant difference in the parameters was noticed. The histopathology demonstrated that the BM-MSCs were able to reduce the infiltration of inflammatory cells and pulmonary hemorrhage and edema.

Conclusions

This study indicated that BM-MSCs play a significant role in the repair of lung injury.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13054-018-2272-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Mortality and pulmonary mechanics in relation to respiratory system and transpulmonary driving pressures in ARDS

PURPOSE

The driving pressure of the respiratory system has been shown to strongly correlate with mortality in a recent large retrospective ARDSnet study. Respiratory system driving pressure [plateau pressure-positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP)] does not account for variable chest wall compliance. Esophageal manometry can be utilized to determine transpulmonary driving pressure. We have examined the relationships between respiratory system and transpulmonary driving pressure, pulmonary mechanics and 28-day mortality.

METHODS

Fifty-six patients from a previous study were analyzed to compare PEEP titration to maintain positive transpulmonary end-expiratory pressure to a control protocol. Respiratory system and transpulmonary driving pressures and pulmonary mechanics were examined at baseline, 5 min and 24 h. Analysis of variance and linear regression were used to compare 28 day survivors versus non-survivors and the intervention group versus the control group, respectively.

RESULTS

At baseline and 5 min there was no difference in respiratory system or transpulmonary driving pressure. By 24 h, survivors had lower respiratory system and transpulmonary driving pressures. Similarly, by 24 h the intervention group had lower transpulmonary driving pressure. This decrease was explained by improved elastance and increased PEEP.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that utilizing PEEP titration to target positive transpulmonary pressure via esophageal manometry causes both improved elastance and driving pressures. Treatment strategies leading to decreased respiratory system and transpulmonary driving pressure at 24 h may be associated with improved 28 day mortality. Studies to clarify the role of respiratory system and transpulmonary driving pressures as a prognosticator and bedside ventilator target are warranted.