Early application of airway pressure release ventilation may reduce the duration of mechanical ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome

Improving oxygenation in a patient with respiratory failure due to morbid obesity by applying airway pressure release ventilation: a case report

INTRODUCTION

Morbidly obese patients occasionally have respiratory problems owing to hypoventilation. Airway pressure release ventilation is one of the ventilation settings often used for respiratory management of acute respiratory distress syndrome. However, previous reports indicating that airway pressure release ventilation may become a therapeutic measure as ventilator management in morbid obesity with respiratory failure is limited. We report a case of markedly improved oxygenation in a morbidly obese patient after airway pressure release ventilation application.

CASE REPORT

A 50s-year-old Asian man (body mass index 41 kg/m2) presented with breathing difficulties. The patient had respiratory failure with a PaO2/FIO2 ratio of approximately 100 and severe atelectasis in the left lung, and ventilator management was initiated. Although the patient was managed on a conventional ventilate mode, oxygenation did not improve. On day 11, we changed the ventilation setting to airway pressure release ventilation, which showed marked improvement in oxygenation with a PaO2/FIO2 ratio of approximately 300. We could reduce sedative medication and apply respiratory rehabilitation. The patient was weaned from the ventilator on day 29 and transferred to another hospital for further rehabilitation on day 31.

CONCLUSION

Airway pressure release ventilation ventilator management in morbidly obese patients may contribute to improving oxygenation and become one of the direct therapeutic measures in the early stage of critical care.

Recruitment-Potential-Oriented Mechanical Ventilation Protocol and Narrative Review for Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Even though much progress has been made to improve clinical outcomes, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remains a significant cause of acute respiratory failure. Protective mechanical ventilation is the backbone of supportive care for these patients; however, there are still many unresolved issues in its setting. The primary goal of mechanical ventilation is to improve oxygenation and ventilation. The use of positive pressure, especially positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), is mandatory in this approach. However, PEEP is a double-edged sword. How to safely set positive end-inspiratory pressure has long been elusive to clinicians. We hereby propose a pressure-volume curve measurement-based method to assess whether injured lungs are recruitable in order to set an appropriate PEEP. For the most severe form of ARDS, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is considered as the salvage therapy. However, the high level of medical resources required and associated complications make its use in patients with severe ARDS controversial. Our proposed protocol also attempts to propose how to improve patient outcomes by balancing the possible overuse of resources with minimizing patient harm due to dangerous ventilator settings. A recruitment-potential-oriented evaluation-based protocol can effectively stabilize hypoxemic conditions quickly and screen out truly serious patients.

Composite outcome measures in high-impact critical care randomised controlled trials: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The use of composite outcome measures (COM) in clinical trials is increasing. Whilst their use is associated with benefits, several limitations have been highlighted and there is limited literature exploring their use within critical care. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the use of COM in high-impact critical care trials, and compare study parameters (including sample size, statistical significance, and consistency of effect estimates) in trials using composite versus non-composite outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review of 16 high-impact journals was conducted. Randomised controlled trials published between 2012 and 2022 reporting a patient important outcome and involving critical care patients, were included.

RESULTS

8271 trials were screened, and 194 included. 39.1% of all trials used a COM and this increased over time. Of those using a COM, only 52.6% explicitly described the outcome as composite. The median number of components was 2 (IQR 2-3). Trials using a COM recruited fewer participants (409 (198.8-851.5) vs 584 (300-1566, p = 0.004), and their use was not associated with increased rates of statistical significance (19.7% vs 17.8%, p = 0.380). Predicted effect sizes were overestimated in all but 6 trials. For studies using a COM the effect estimates were consistent across all components in 43.4% of trials. 93% of COM included components that were not patient important.

CONCLUSIONS

COM are increasingly used in critical care trials; however effect estimates are frequently inconsistent across COM components confounding outcome interpretations. The use of COM was associated with smaller sample sizes, and no increased likelihood of statistically significant results. Many of the limitations inherent to the use of COM are relevant to critical care research.

Early pathophysiology-driven airway pressure release ventilation versus low tidal volume ventilation strategy for patients with moderate-severe ARDS: study protocol for a randomized, multicenter, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Conventional Mechanical ventilation modes used for individuals suffering from acute respiratory distress syndrome have the potential to exacerbate lung injury through regional alveolar overinflation and/or repetitive alveolar collapse with shearing, known as atelectrauma. Animal studies have demonstrated that airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) offers distinct advantages over conventional mechanical ventilation modes. However, the methodologies for implementing APRV vary widely, and the findings from clinical studies remain controversial. This study (APRVplus trial), aims to assess the impact of an early pathophysiology-driven APRV ventilation approach compared to a low tidal volume ventilation (LTV) strategy on the prognosis of patients with moderate to severe ARDS.

METHODS

The APRVplus trial is a prospective, multicenter, randomized clinical trial, building upon our prior single-center study, to enroll 840 patients from at least 35 hospitals in China. This investigation plans to compare the early pathophysiology-driven APRV ventilation approach with the control intervention of LTV lung-protective ventilation. The primary outcome measure will be all-cause mortality at 28 days after randomization in the intensive care units (ICU). Secondary outcome measures will include assessments of oxygenation, and physiology parameters at baseline, as well as on days 1, 2, and 3. Additionally, clinical outcomes such as ventilator-free days at 28 days, duration of ICU and hospital stay, ICU and hospital mortality, and the occurrence of adverse events will be evaluated.

TRIAL ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The research project has obtained approval from the Ethics Committee of West China Hospital of Sichuan University (2019-337). Informed consent is required. The results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at one or more scientific conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered at Clinical Trials.gov (NCT03549910) on June 8, 2018.

Inconsistent Methods Used to Set Airway Pressure Release Ventilation in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis

Airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) is a protective mechanical ventilation mode for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) that theoretically may reduce ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI) and ARDS-related mortality. However, there is no standard method to set and adjust the APRV mode shown to be optimal. Therefore, we performed a meta-regression analysis to evaluate how the four individual APRV settings impacted the outcome in these patients. Methods: Studies investigating the use of the APRV mode for ARDS patients were searched from electronic databases. We tested individual settings, including (1) high airway pressure (PHigh); (2) low airway pressure (PLow); (3) time at high airway pressure (THigh); and (4) time at low pressure (TLow) for association with PaO2/FiO2 ratio and ICU length of stay. Results: There was no significant difference in PaO2/FiO2 ratio between the groups in any of the four settings (PHigh difference -12.0 [95% CI -100.4, 86.4]; PLow difference 54.3 [95% CI -52.6, 161.1]; TLow difference -27.19 [95% CI -127.0, 72.6]; THigh difference -51.4 [95% CI -170.3, 67.5]). There was high heterogeneity across all parameters (PhHgh I2 = 99.46%, PLow I2 = 99.16%, TLow I2 = 99.31%, THigh I2 = 99.29%). Conclusions: None of the four individual APRV settings independently were associated with differences in outcome. A holistic approach, analyzing all settings in combination, may improve APRV efficacy since it is known that small differences in ventilator settings can significantly alter mortality. Future clinical trials should set and adjust APRV based on the best current scientific evidence available.

[Ventilation concepts under extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS)]

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is often the last resort for escalation of treatment in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The success of treatment is mainly determined by patient-specific factors, such as age, comorbidities, duration and invasiveness of the pre-existing ventilation treatment as well as the expertise of the treating ECMO center. In particular, the adjustment of mechanical ventilation during ongoing ECMO treatment remains controversial. Although a reduction of invasiveness of mechanical ventilation seems to be reasonable due to physiological considerations, no improvement in outcome has been demonstrated so far for the use of ultraprotective ventilation regimens.

Inhalation Injury, Respiratory Failure, and Ventilator Support in Acute Burn Care

Sustaining an inhalation injury increases the risk of severe complications and mortality. Current evidential support to guide treatment of the injury or subsequent complications is lacking, as studies either exclude inhalation injury or design limit inferences that can be made. Conventional ventilator modes are most commonly used, but there is no consensus on optimal strategies. Settings should be customized to patient tolerance and response. Data for pharmacotherapy adjunctive treatments are limited.

Invasive Mechanical Ventilation

Invasive mechanical ventilation allows clinicians to support gas exchange and work of breathing in patients with respiratory failure. However, there is also potential for iatrogenesis. By understanding the benefits and limitations of different modes of ventilation and goals for gas exchange, clinicians can choose a strategy that provides appropriate support while minimizing harm. The ventilator can also provide crucial diagnostic information in the form of respiratory mechanics. These, and the mechanical ventilation strategy, should be regularly reassessed.

Successful application of airway pressure release ventilation in a child with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome induced by trauma: a case report

BACKGROUND

Trauma has been identified as one of the risk factors for acute respiratory distress syndrome. Respiratory support can be further complicated by comorbidities of trauma such as primary or secondary lung injury. Conventional ventilation strategies may not be suitable for all trauma-related acute respiratory distress syndrome. Airway pressure release ventilation has emerged as a potential rescue method for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome and hypoxemia refractory to conventional mechanical ventilation. However, there is a lack of research on the use of airway pressure release ventilation in children with trauma-related acute respiratory distress syndrome. We report a case of airway pressure release ventilation applied to a child with falling injury, severe acute respiratory distress syndrome, hemorrhagic shock, and bilateral hemopneumothorax. We hope this case report presents a potential option for trauma-related acute respiratory distress syndrome and serves as a basis for future research.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 15-year-old female with falling injury who developed severe acute respiratory distress syndrome, hemorrhagic shock, and bilateral hemopneumothorax was admitted to the surgical intensive care unit. She presented refractory hypoxemia despite the treatment of conventional ventilation with deep analgesia, sedation, and muscular relaxation. Lung recruitment was ineffective and prone positioning was contraindicated. Her oxygenation significantly improved after the use of airway pressure release ventilation. She was eventually extubated after 12 days of admission and discharged after 42 days of hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

Airway pressure release ventilation may be considered early in the management of trauma patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome when prone position ventilation cannot be performed and refractory hypoxemia persists despite conventional ventilation and lung recruitment maneuvers.

Awareness and practice of airway pressure release ventilation mode in acute respiratory distress syndrome patients among nurses in Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to assess the knowledge and current practice of using the airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) mode with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients and identify barriers to not using this mode of ventilation among nurses who work in critical areas in Saudi Arabia.

METHODS

Between December 2022 and April 2023, a cross-sectional online survey was disseminated to nurses working in critical care areas in Saudi Arabia. The characteristics of the respondents were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Percentages and frequencies were used to report categorical variables.

RESULTS

Overall, 1,002 nurses responded to the online survey, of whom 592 (59.1%) were female. Only 248 (24.7%) nurses had ever used APRV mode, whereas only 229 (22.8%) received training on APRV mode. Moreover, 602 (60.0%) nurses did not know whether APRV was utilized in their hospital. Additionally, 658 (65.6%) nurses did not know whether APRV mode was managed using a standard protocol. Prone positioning was the highest recommended intervention by 444 (43.8%) when a conventional MV failed to improve oxygenation in patients with ARDS. 323 (32.2%) respondents stated that the P-high should be set equal to the plateau pressure on a conventional ventilator, while 400 (39.9%) said that the P-low should match PEEP from a conventional ventilator. Almost half of the respondents (446, 44.5%) stated that the T-high should be set between 4 and 6 s, while 415 (41.4%) said that the T-low should be set at 0.4 to 0.8 s. Over half of the nurses (540, 53.9%) thought that the maximum allowed tidal volume during the release phase should be 4-6 ml/kg. Moreover, 475 (47.4%) believed that the maximum allowed P-high setting should be 35 cm H2O. One-third of the responders (329, 32.8%) stated that when weaning patients with ARDS while in APRV mode, the P-high should be reduced gradually to reach a target of 10 cm H2O. However, 444 (44.3%) thought that the T-high should be gradually increased to reach a target of 10 s. Half of the responders (556, 55.5%) felt that the criteria to switch the patient to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) were for the patient to have an FiO2 ≤ 0.4, P-high ≤ 10 cm H2O, and T-high ≥ 10 s. Lack of training was the most common barrier to not using APRV by 615 (61.4%).

CONCLUSION

The majority of nurses who work in critical care units have not received sufficient training in APRV mode. A significant discrepancy was observed regarding the clinical application and management of APRV parameters. Inadequate training was the most frequently reported barrier to the use of APRV in patients with ARDS.

Airway Pressure Release Ventilation in COVID-19-Associated Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome-A Multicenter Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Background: There are limited and partially contradictory data on the effects of airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) in COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (CARDS). Therefore, we analyzed the clinical outcome, complications, and longitudinal course of ventilation parameters and laboratory values in patients with CARDS, who were mechanically ventilated using APRV. Methods: Respective data from 4 intensive care units (ICUs) were collected and compared to a matched cohort of patients receiving conventional low tidal volume ventilation (LTV). Propensity score matching was performed based on age, sex, blood gas analysis, and APACHE II score at admission, as well as the implementation of prone positioning. Findings: Forty patients with CARDS, who were mechanically ventilated using APRV, and 40 patients receiving LTV were matched. No significant differences were detected for tidal volumes per predicted body weight, peak pressure values, and blood gas analyses on admission, 6 h post admission as well as on day 3 and day 7. Regarding ICU survival, no significant difference was identified between APRV patients (40%) and LTV patients (42%). Median duration of mechanical ventilation and duration of ICU treatment were comparable in both groups. Similar complication rates with respect to ventilator-associated pneumonia, septic shock, thromboembolic events, barotrauma, as well as the necessity for hemodialysis were detected for both groups. Clinical characteristics that were associated with increased mortality in a Cox proportional hazards regression analysis included age (hazard ratio [HR] 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.1; P < .001), severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (HR 2.62, 95% CI 1.02-6.7; P = .046) and the occurrence of septic shock (HR 17.18, 95% CI 2.06-143.2; P = .009), but not the ventilation mode. Interpretation: Intensive care unit survival, duration of mechanical ventilation, and ICU treatment as well as ventilation-associated complication rates were equivalent using APRV compared to conventional LTV in patients with CARDS.

Future directions in ventilator-induced lung injury associated cognitive impairment: a new sight

Mechanical ventilation is a widely used short-term life support technique, but an accompanying adverse consequence can be pulmonary damage which is called ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI). Mechanical ventilation can potentially affect the central nervous system and lead to long-term cognitive impairment. In recent years, many studies revealed that VILI, as a common lung injury, may be involved in the central pathogenesis of cognitive impairment by inducing hypoxia, inflammation, and changes in neural pathways. In addition, VILI has received attention in affecting the treatment of cognitive impairment and provides new insights into individualized therapy. The combination of lung protective ventilation and drug therapy can overcome the inevitable problems of poor prognosis from a new perspective. In this review, we summarized VILI and non-VILI factors as risk factors for cognitive impairment and concluded the latest mechanisms. Moreover, we retrospectively explored the role of improving VILI in cognitive impairment treatment. This work contributes to a better understanding of the pathogenesis of VILI-induced cognitive impairment and may provide future direction for the treatment and prognosis of cognitive impairment.

A Fast-Track Respiratory Protocol for High Cervical Spine Injury: A Case Report

BACKGROUND

Cervical spinal cord injury can greatly affect pulmonary function, resulting in complications, including respiratory failure with prolonged mechanical ventilation, ultimately leading to increased mortality and high health care costs. Weaning from mechanical ventilation is particularly challenging in patients with complete high spinal cord injury.

CASE PRESENTATION

We present the case of a 42-year-old man who suffered a complete cervical 5-6 spinal cord injury following a rollover motor vehicle crash and subsequently developed postoperative pneumonia and severe hypoxemic respiratory failure. He received a novel approach to fast-track respiratory care, including early and aggressive secretion clearance management, moderate pressure level of airway pressure release ventilation, timely transition to spontaneous mode, early tracheostomy and humane care, and high-flow oxygenation via tracheotomy after weaning off the ventilator. As a result, the patient experienced significant improvement in pulmonary function and was successfully liberated from the ventilator within a 2-week period.

CONCLUSION

This case highlights the potential effectiveness of fast-track respiratory care in promoting lung function restoration and expediting liberation from mechanical ventilation in patients with severe hypoxemic respiratory failure following a complete cervical spinal cord injury. However, further research is warranted to validate these findings and expand our understanding in this area.

Management of Hantavirus Cardiopulmonary Syndrome in Critical Care Transport: A Review

In 1993, the Southwest found itself staring down a disease then known as "unexplained adult respiratory syndrome." During the outbreak, 12 of 23 known patients died. What we now recognize as hantavirus cardiopulmonary syndrome still remains a rare and deadly disease. Although no cure exists, modern supportive techniques such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation have increased survival among these patients. Early diagnosis has become the primary factor in patient survival. The initial presentation of hantavirus is similar to acute respiratory distress syndrome, necessitating a high index of suspicion to afford the patient the best chance of survival. Diagnosis is further complicated by prolonged and nonspecific incubation periods making it difficult to pinpoint an exposure. Familiarizing oneself with common clinical presentations, diagnostic strategies, and testing is the best way to increase patient survival. Because hantavirus has a predilection for rural areas, transport to a tertiary facility is paramount to provide the resources necessary to care for these complex patients. Rapid sequence intubation, although common in airway-compromised patients, could prove fatal in the setting of the severe hemodynamic instability found in hantavirus cardiopulmonary syndrome. Anticipation of significant pressor use and fluid administration could likely mean the difference in patient mortality during transport.

Correlations between APACHE-II score and pressure parameters of mechanical ventilation in patients with ARDS and their value in prognostic evaluation

Objective

To investigate the correlations between APACHE-II score and pressure parameters of mechanical ventilation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and their value in prognostic evaluation.

Methods

This was a retrospective study. The clinical data of 79 patients with ARDS treated in Shengzhou Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine from April 2020 to April 2022 were analyzed retrospectively. According to whether their APACHE-II scores were higher than 15, they were divided into low score group (n= 20) and high score group (n= 59). The plateau pressure (Pplat), driving pressure(ΔP) and mean airway pressure (Pmean) were compared. The correlation between APACHE-II score and pressure parameters of mechanical ventilation was analyzed. Based on the follow-up of 28-d survival, their Pplat, ΔP, Pmean and APACHE-II scores were compared. The value of APACHE-II score and pressure parameters in the prognostic evaluation of ARDS patients was analyzed.

Results

Pplat, ΔP and Pmean in the low score group were significantly lower than those in the high score group(P<0.05). Pplat, ΔP, Pmean and APACHE-II score in the survival group were significantly lower than those in the control group(P<0.05). APACHE-II score showed significantly positive correlations with Pplat, ΔP and Pmean. The AUC of Pmean, Pplat, ΔP and APACHE-II score in predicting the prognosis and diagnosis of ARDS patients was 0.761, 0.833, 0.754 and 0.832, respectively.

Conclusion

APACHE-II score of ARDS patients shows significantly positive correlations with pressure parameters of mechanical ventilation, and has diagnostic value for the prognosis of ARDS patients.

Sample size estimation in clinical trials using ventilator-free days as the primary outcome: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Ventilator-free days (VFDs) are a composite endpoint increasingly used as the primary outcome in critical care trials. However, because of the skewed distribution and competitive risk between components, sample size estimation remains challenging. This systematic review was conducted to systematically assess whether the sample size was congruent, as calculated to evaluate VFDs in trials, with VFDs' distribution and the impact of alternative methods on sample size estimation.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted within the PubMed and Embase databases for randomized clinical trials in adults with VFDs as the primary outcome until December 2021. We focused on peer-reviewed journals with 2021 impact factors greater than five. After reviewing definitions of VFDs, we extracted the sample size and methods used for its estimation. The data were collected by two independent investigators and recorded in a standardized, pilot-tested forms tool. Sample sizes were calculated using alternative statistical approaches, and risks of bias were assessed with the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool.

RESULTS

Of the 26 clinical trials included, 19 (73%) raised "some concerns" when assessing risks of bias. Twenty-four (92%) trials were two-arm superiority trials, and 23 (89%) were conducted at multiple sites. Almost all the trials (96%) were unable to consider the unique distribution of VFDs and death as a competitive risk. Moreover, significant heterogeneity was found in the definitions of VFDs, especially regarding varying start time and type of respiratory support. Methods for sample size estimation were also heterogeneous, and simple models, such as the Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon rank-sum test, were used in 14 (54%) trials. Finally, the sample sizes calculated varied by a factor of 1.6 to 17.4.

CONCLUSIONS

A standardized definition and methodology for VFDs, including the use of a core outcome set, seems to be required. Indeed, this could facilitate the interpretation of findings in clinical trials, as well as their construction, especially the sample size estimation which is a trade-off between cost, ethics, and statistical power. Systematic review registration PROSPERO ID: CRD42021282304. Registered 15 December 2021 ( https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021282304 ).

Mechanical ventilation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: current status and future perspectives

INTRODUCTION

Although there has been extensive research on mechanical ventilation for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), treatment remains mainly supportive. Recent studies and new ventilatory modes have been proposed to manage patients with ARDS; however, the clinical impact of these strategies remains uncertain and not clearly supported by guidelines. The aim of this narrative review is to provide an overview and update on ventilatory management for patients with ARDS.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews the literature regarding mechanical ventilation in ARDS. A comprehensive overview of the principal settings for the ventilator parameters involved is provided as well as a report on the differences between controlled and assisted ventilation. Additionally, new modes of assisted ventilation are presented and discussed. The evidence concerning rescue strategies, including recruitment maneuvers and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support, is analyzed. PubMed, EBSCO, and the Cochrane Library were searched up until June 2023, for relevant literature.

EXPERT OPINION

Available evidence for mechanical ventilation in cases of ARDS suggests the use of a personalized mechanical ventilation strategy. Although promising, new modes of assisted mechanical ventilation are still under investigation and guidelines do not recommend rescue strategies as the standard of care. Further research on this topic is required.

Effects of airway pressure release ventilation on lung physiology assessed by electrical impedance tomography in patients with early moderate-to-severe ARDS

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the physiological impact of airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) on patients with early moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) by electrical impedance tomography (EIT).

METHODS

In this single-center prospective physiological study, adult patients with early moderate-to-severe ARDS mechanically ventilated with APRV were assessed by EIT shortly after APRV (T0), and 6 h (T1), 12 h (T2), and 24 h (T3) after APRV initiation. Regional ventilation and perfusion distribution, dead space (%), shunt (%), and ventilation/perfusion matching (%) based on EIT measurement at different time points were compared. Additionally, clinical variables related to respiratory and hemodynamic condition were analyzed.

RESULTS

Twelve patients were included in the study. After APRV, lung ventilation and perfusion were significantly redistributed to dorsal region. One indicator of ventilation distribution heterogeneity is the global inhomogeneity index, which decreased gradually [0.61 (0.55-0.62) to 0.50 (0.42-0.53), p < 0.001]. The other is the center of ventilation, which gradually shifted towards the dorsal region (43.31 ± 5.07 to 46.84 ± 4.96%, p = 0.048). The dorsal ventilation/perfusion matching increased significantly from T0 to T3 (25.72 ± 9.01 to 29.80 ± 7.19%, p = 0.007). Better dorsal ventilation (%) was significantly correlated with higher PaO₂/FiO₂ (r = 0.624, p = 0.001) and lower PaCO₂ (r = -0.408, p = 0.048).

CONCLUSIONS

APRV optimizes the distribution of ventilation and perfusion, reducing lung heterogeneity, which potentially reduces the risk of ventilator-induced lung injury.

Airway Pressure Release Ventilation for Acute Respiratory Failure Due to Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective: To explore the evidence surrounding the use of Airway Pressure Release Ventilation (APRV) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: A Systematic electronic search of PUBMED, EMBASE, and the WHO COVID-19 database. We also searched the grey literature via Google and preprint servers (medRxive and research square). Eligible studies included randomised controlled trials and observational studies comparing APRV to conventional mechanical ventilation (CMV) in adults with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 and reporting at least one of the following outcomes; in-hospital mortality, ventilator free days (VFDs), ICU length of stay (LOS), changes in gas exchange parameters, and barotrauma. Two authors independently screened and selected articles for inclusion and extracted data in a pre-specified form. Results: Of 181 articles screened, seven studies (one randomised controlled trial, two cohort studies, and four before-after studies) were included comprising 354 patients. APRV was initiated at a mean of 1.2-13 days after intubation. APRV wasn't associated with improved mortality compared to CMV (relative risk [RR], 1.20; 95% CI 0.70-2.05; I², 61%) neither better VFDs (ratio of means [RoM], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.52-1.24; I², 0%) nor ICU LOS (RoM, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.79-1.51; I², 57%). Compared to CMV, APRV was associated with a 33% increase in PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio (RoM, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.21-1.48; I², 29%) and a 9% decrease in PaCO₂ (RoM, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.02-1.15; I², 0%). There was no significant increased risk of barotrauma compared to CMV (RR, 1.55; 95% CI, 0.60-4.00; I², 0%). Conclusions: In adult patients with COVID-19 requiring mechanical ventilation, APRV is associated with improved gas exchange but not mortality nor VFDs when compared with CMV. The results were limited by high uncertainty given the low quality of the available studies and limited number of patients. Adequately powered and well-designed clinical trials to define the role of APRV in COVID-19 patients are still needed. Registration: PROSPERO; CRD42021291234.

Techniques for Oxygenation and Ventilation in Coronavirus Disease 2019

This paper discusses mechanisms of hypoxemia and interventions to oxygenate critically ill patients with COVID-19 which range from nasal cannula to noninvasive and mechanical ventilation. Noninvasive ventilation includes continuous positive airway pressure ventilation (CPAP) and high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) with or without proning. The evidence for each of these modalities is discussed and thereafter, when to transition to mechanical ventilation (MV). Various techniques of MV, again with and without proning, and rescue strategies which would include extra corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) when it is available and permissive hypoxemia where it is not, are discussed.

Management of refractory hypoxemia using recruitment maneuvers and rescue therapies: A comprehensive review

Refractory hypoxemia in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome treated with mechanical ventilation is one of the most challenging conditions in human and veterinary intensive care units. When a conventional lung protective approach fails to restore adequate oxygenation to the patient, the use of recruitment maneuvers and positive end-expiratory pressure to maximize alveolar recruitment, improve gas exchange and respiratory mechanics, while reducing the risk of ventilator-induced lung injury has been suggested in people as the open lung approach. Although the proposed physiological rationale of opening and keeping open previously collapsed or obstructed airways is sound, the technique for doing so, as well as the potential benefits regarding patient outcome are highly controversial in light of recent randomized controlled trials. Moreover, a variety of alternative therapies that provide even less robust evidence have been investigated, including prone positioning, neuromuscular blockade, inhaled pulmonary vasodilators, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and unconventional ventilatory modes such as airway pressure release ventilation. With the exception of prone positioning, these modalities are limited by their own balance of risks and benefits, which can be significantly influenced by the practitioner's experience. This review explores the rationale, evidence, advantages and disadvantages of each of these therapies as well as available methods to identify suitable candidates for recruitment maneuvers, with a summary on their application in veterinary medicine. Undoubtedly, the heterogeneous and evolving nature of acute respiratory distress syndrome and individual lung phenotypes call for a personalized approach using new non-invasive bedside assessment tools, such as electrical impedance tomography, lung ultrasound, and the recruitment-to-inflation ratio to assess lung recruitability. Data available in human medicine provide valuable insights that could, and should, be used to improve the management of veterinary patients with severe respiratory failure with respect to their intrinsic anatomy and physiology.

Early use of airway pressure release ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome induced by coronavirus disease 2019: a case report

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 is a highly transmissible and pathogenic viral infection caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, a novel coronavirus that was identified in early January 2020 in Wuhan, China, and has become a pandemic disease worldwide. The symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 range from asymptomatic to severe respiratory failure. In moderate and severe cases, oxygen therapy is needed. In severe cases, high-flow nasal cannula, noninvasive ventilation, and invasive mechanical ventilation are needed. Many ventilation methods in mechanical ventilation can be used, but not all are suitable for coronavirus disease 2019 patients. Airway pressure release ventilation, which is one of the mechanical ventilation methods, can be considered for patients with moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. It was found that oxygenation in the airway pressure release ventilation method was better than in the conventional method. How about airway pressure release ventilation in coronavirus disease 2019 patients? We report a case of confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 in which airway pressure release ventilation mode was used.

CASE PRESENTATION

In this case study, we report a 74-year-old Chinese with a history of hypertension and uncontrolled diabetes mellitus type 2. He came to our hospital with the chief complaint of difficulty in breathing. He was fully awake with an oxygen saturation of 82% on room air. The patient was admitted and diagnosed with severe coronavirus disease 2019, and he was given a nonrebreathing mask at 15 L per minute, and oxygen saturation went back to 95%. After a few hours with a nonrebreathing mask, his condition worsened. On the third day after admission, saturation went down despite using noninvasive ventilation. We decided to intubate the patient and used airway pressure release ventilation mode. Finally, after 14 days of being intubated, the patient could be extubated and discharged after 45 days of hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

Early use of airway pressure release ventilation may be considered as one of the ventilation strategies to treat severe coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome. Although reports on airway pressure release ventilation and protocols on its initiation and titration methods are limited, it may be worthwhile to consider, given its known ability to maximize alveolar recruitment, preserve alveolar epithelial integrity, and surfactant, all of which are crucial for handling the "fragile" lungs of coronavirus disease 2019 patients.

Effects of airway pressure release ventilation on multi-organ injuries in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome pig models

BACKGROUND

Extra-pulmonary multi-organ failure in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a major cause of high mortality. Our purpose is to assess whether airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) causes more multi-organ damage than low tidal volume ventilation (LTV).

METHODS

Twenty one pigs were randomized into control group (n = 3), ARDS group (n = 3), LTV group (n = 8) and APRV group (n = 7). Severe ARDS model was induced by repeated bronchial saline lavages. Pigs were ventilated and monitored continuously for 48 h. Respiratory data, hemodynamic data, serum inflammatory cytokines were collected throughout the study. Histological injury and apoptosis were assessed by two pathologists.

RESULTS

After severe ARDS modeling, pigs in ARDS, LTV and APRV groups experienced significant hypoxemia and reduced lung static compliance (C_stat). Oxygenation recovered progressively after 16 h mechanical ventilation (MV) in LTV and APRV group. The results of the repeated measures ANOVA showed no statistical difference in the PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio between the APRV and LTV groups (p = 0.54). The C_stat showed a considerable improvement in APRV group with statistical significance (p < 0.01), which was significantly higher than in the LTV group since 16 h (p = 0.04). Histological injury scores showed a significantly lower injury score in the middle and lower lobes of the right lung in the APRV group compared to LTV (p_middle = 0.04, p_lower = 0.01), and no significant increase in injury scores for extra-pulmonary organs, including kidney (p = 0.10), small intestine (p = 1.0), liver (p = 0.14, p = 0.13) and heart (p = 0.20). There were no significant differences in serum inflammatory cytokines between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, in the experimental pig models of severe ARDS induced by repetitive saline lavage, APRV improved lung compliance with reduced lung injury of middle and lower lobes, and did not demonstrate more extra-pulmonary organ injuries as compared with LTV.

The Impact of BiLevel Positive Airway Pressure (BiPAP) Application Timing on Emergency Room Length of Stay in Patients With Pulmonary Edema: A Single-Center, Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

 Bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP) is a form of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) that is used to help and facilitate breathing. Our objective is to evaluate the impact of BiPAP application time on the length of emergency room (ER) stay in pulmonary edema patients.

METHOD

This is a retrospective cohort study that included patients who presented to the ER at King Abdullah Medical City (KAMC) from June 2019 to June 2021. The eligibility criteria for BiPAP application were congestive heart failure (CHF) and type 1 and type 2 respiratory failure, The data were collected from the Track Care system. We defined early BiPAP as BiPAP application time within one hour from admission, and late BiPAP more than one hour and we calculated the percentage of discharge within four hours in each group.

RESULT

 Out of 147 fulfilling study eligibility, 64% had CHF, 23% had type 2 respiratory failure and 13% had type 1 respiratory failure. For patients discharged within four hours, 85% were in the early BiPAP and 15% were in the late BiPAP groups (p = 0.001 as compared to the late discharge group). Discharge within four hours was observed with the following percentages in the study subgroups: CHF early BiPAP (84%), late BiPAP (16%) (p = 0.004), type 1 respiratory failure early BiPAP (79%), late BiPAP (21%) (p = 0.71) and type 2 respiratory failure early BiPAP (94%), late BiPAP (6%) (p = 0.89).

CONCLUSION

 Our results show that there is a significant outcome in early BiPAP application in decreasing the length of ER stay only in patients with pulmonary edema.

A Delphi Survey of Canadian Respiratory Therapists' Practice Statements on Pediatric Mechanical Ventilation

BACKGROUND

Pediatric mechanical ventilation practice guidelines are not well established; therefore, the European Society for Paediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care (ESPNIC) developed consensus recommendations on pediatric mechanical ventilation management in 2017. However, the guideline's applicability in different health care settings is unknown. This study aimed to determine the consensus on pediatric mechanical ventilation practices from Canadian respiratory therapists' (RTs) perspectives and consensually validate aspects of the ESPNIC guideline.

METHODS

A 3-round modified electronic Delphi survey was conducted; contents were guided by ESPNIC. Participants were RTs with at least 5 years of experience working in standalone pediatric ICUs or units with dedicated pediatric intensive care beds across Canada. Round 1 collected open-text feedback, and subsequent rounds gathered feedback using a 6-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined as ≥ 75% agreement; if consensus was unmet, statements were revised for re-ranking in the subsequent round.

RESULTS

Fifty-two RTs from 14 different pediatric facilities participated in at least one of the 3 rounds. Rounds 1, 2, and 3 had a response rate of 80%, 93%, and 96%, respectively. A total of 59 practice statements achieved consensus by the end of round 3, categorized into 10 sections: (1) noninvasive ventilation and high-flow oxygen therapy, (2) tidal volume and inspiratory pressures, (3) breathing frequency and inspiratory times, (4) PEEP and F_IO2 , (5) advanced modes of ventilation, (6) weaning, (7) physiological targets, (8) monitoring, (9) general, and (10) equipment adjuncts. Cumulative text feedback guided the formation of the clinical remarks to supplement these practice statements.

CONCLUSIONS

This was the first study to survey RTs for their perspectives on the general practice of pediatric mechanical ventilation management in Canada, generally aligning with the ESPNIC guideline. These practice statements considered information from health organizations and institutes, supplemented with clinical remarks. Future studies are necessary to verify and understand these practices' effectiveness.

The optimal management of the patient with COVID‐19 pneumonia: HFNC, NIV/CPAP or mechanical ventilation?

The recent pandemic has seen unprecedented demand for respiratory support of patients with COVID‐19 pneumonia, stretching services and clinicians. Yet despite the global numbers of patients treated, guidance is not clear on the correct choice of modality or the timing of escalation of therapy for an individual patient.This narrative review assesses the available literature on the best use of different modalities of respiratory support for an individual patient, and discusses benefits and risks of each, coupled with practical advice to improve outcomes. On current data, in an ideal context, it appears that as disease severity worsens, conventional oxygen therapy is not sufficient alone. In more severe disease, i.e. PaO2/FiO2 ratios below approximately 200, helmet‐CPAP (continuous positive airway pressure) (although not widely available) may be superior to high‐flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy or facemask non‐invasive ventilation (NIV)/CPAP, and that facemask NIV/CPAP may be superior to HFNC, but with noted important complications, including risk of pneumothoraces. In an ideal context, invasive mechanical ventilation should not be delayed where indicated and available. Vitally, the choice of respiratory support should not be prescriptive but contextualised to each setting, as supply and demand of resources vary markedly between institutions. Over time, institutions should develop clear policies to guide clinicians before demand exceeds supply, and should frequently review best practice as evidence matures.

Inclusion of airway pressure release ventilation in the management of respiratory failure and refractory hypercapnia in a dog

OBJECTIVE

To describe the use of airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) to relieve hypercapnia in a dog undergoing mechanical ventilation.

CASE SUMMARY

A 3-month-old male Shar-Pei mix presented to the emergency department with suspected noncardiogenic pulmonary edema. Due to severe hypercapnia, mechanical ventilation was initiated. The hypercapnia failed to improve with conventional pressure control mechanical ventilation, bronchodilator administration, suctioning, or endotracheal tube replacement. The dog was transitioned to APRV and maintained in this mode for 36 hours. A modified APRV protocol in which inverse inspiratory to expiratory ratios ranged from 4.3:1 to 6.0:1 was utilized, resulting in a drastic improvement in the patient's hypercapnia. The patient eventually was transitioned off the ventilator, and no respiratory abnormalities have been noted at subsequent recheck examinations.

NEW OR UNIQUE INFORMATION PROVIDED

This case documents the first use of APRV to relieve refractory hypercapnia in a dog undergoing mechanical ventilation and is one of the only recorded cases of using APRV for this purpose in the medical literature at large. APRV may be considered in cases of hypercapnia when traditional therapies fail, although caution is warranted as this mode of ventilation can also worsen hypercapnia.

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) occurs in up to 10% of patients with respiratory failure admitted through the emergency department. Use of noninvasive respiratory support has proliferated in recent years; clinicians must understand the relative merits and risks of these technologies and know how to recognize signs of failure. The cornerstone of ARDS care of the mechanically ventilated patient is low-tidal volume ventilation based on ideal body weight. Adjunctive therapies, such as prone positioning and neuromuscular blockade, may have a role in the emergency department management of ARDS depending on patient and department characteristics.

Myths and Misconceptions of Airway Pressure Release Ventilation: Getting Past the Noise and on to the Signal

In the pursuit of science, competitive ideas and debate are necessary means to attain knowledge and expose our ignorance. To quote Murray Gell-Mann (1969 Nobel Prize laureate in Physics): "Scientific orthodoxy kills truth". In mechanical ventilation, the goal is to provide the best approach to support patients with respiratory failure until the underlying disease resolves, while minimizing iatrogenic damage. This compromise characterizes the philosophy behind the concept of "lung protective" ventilation. Unfortunately, inadequacies of the current conceptual model-that focuses exclusively on a nominal value of low tidal volume and promotes shrinking of the "baby lung" - is reflected in the high mortality rate of patients with moderate and severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. These data call for exploration and investigation of competitive models evaluated thoroughly through a scientific process. Airway Pressure Release Ventilation (APRV) is one of the most studied yet controversial modes of mechanical ventilation that shows promise in experimental and clinical data. Over the last 3 decades APRV has evolved from a rescue strategy to a preemptive lung injury prevention approach with potential to stabilize the lung and restore alveolar homogeneity. However, several obstacles have so far impeded the evaluation of APRV's clinical efficacy in large, randomized trials. For instance, there is no universally accepted standardized method of setting APRV and thus, it is not established whether its effects on clinical outcomes are due to the ventilator mode per se or the method applied. In addition, one distinctive issue that hinders proper scientific evaluation of APRV is the ubiquitous presence of myths and misconceptions repeatedly presented in the literature. In this review we discuss some of these misleading notions and present data to advance scientific discourse around the uses and misuses of APRV in the current literature.

The Effects of Airway Pressure Release Ventilation on Pulmonary Permeability in Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Pig Models

Objective: The aim of the study was to compare the effects of APRV and LTV ventilation on pulmonary permeability in severe ARDS.

Methods: Mini Bama adult pigs were randomized into the APRV group (n = 5) and LTV group (n = 5). A severe ARDS animal model was induced by the whole lung saline lavage. Pigs were ventilated and monitored continuously for 48 h.

Results: Compared with the LTV group, CStat was significantly better (p &lt; 0.05), and the PaO2/FiO2 ratio showed a trend to be higher throughout the period of the experiment in the APRV group. The extravascular lung water index and pulmonary vascular permeability index showed a trend to be lower in the APRV group. APRV also significantly mitigates lung histopathologic injury determined by the lung histopathological injury score (p &lt; 0.05) and gross pathological changes of lung tissues. The protein contents of occludin (p &lt; 0.05), claudin-5 (p &lt; 0.05), E-cadherin (p &lt; 0.05), and VE-cadherin (p &lt; 0.05) in the middle lobe of the right lung were higher in the APRV group than in the LTV group; among them, the contents of occludin (p &lt; 0.05) and E-cadherin (p &lt; 0.05) of the whole lung were higher in the APRV group. Transmission electron microscopy showed that alveolar–capillary barrier damage was more severe in the middle lobe of lungs in the LTV group.

Conclusion: In comparison with LTV, APRV could preserve the alveolar–capillary barrier architecture, mitigate lung histopathologic injury, increase the expression of cell junction protein, improve respiratory system compliance, and showed a trend to reduce extravascular lung water and improve oxygenation. These findings indicated that APRV might lead to more profound beneficial effects on the integrity of the alveolar–capillary barrier architecture and on the expression of biomarkers related to pulmonary permeability.

ARDS Clinical Practice Guideline 2021

BACKGROUND

The joint committee of the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine/Japanese Respiratory Society/Japanese Society of Respiratory Care Medicine on ARDS Clinical Practice Guideline has created and released the ARDS Clinical Practice Guideline 2021.

METHODS

The 2016 edition of the Clinical Practice Guideline covered clinical questions (CQs) that targeted only adults, but the present guideline includes 15 CQs for children in addition to 46 CQs for adults. As with the previous edition, we used a systematic review method with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system as well as a degree of recommendation determination method. We also conducted systematic reviews that used meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy and network meta-analyses as a new method.

RESULTS

Recommendations for adult patients with ARDS are described: we suggest against using serum C-reactive protein and procalcitonin levels to identify bacterial pneumonia as the underlying disease (GRADE 2D); we recommend limiting tidal volume to 4-8 mL/kg for mechanical ventilation (GRADE 1D); we recommend against managements targeting an excessively low SpO2 (PaO2) (GRADE 2D); we suggest against using transpulmonary pressure as a routine basis in positive end-expiratory pressure settings (GRADE 2B); we suggest implementing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for those with severe ARDS (GRADE 2B); we suggest against using high-dose steroids (GRADE 2C); and we recommend using low-dose steroids (GRADE 1B). The recommendations for pediatric patients with ARDS are as follows: we suggest against using non-invasive respiratory support (non-invasive positive pressure ventilation/high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy) (GRADE 2D), we suggest placing pediatric patients with moderate ARDS in the prone position (GRADE 2D), we suggest against routinely implementing NO inhalation therapy (GRADE 2C), and we suggest against implementing daily sedation interruption for pediatric patients with respiratory failure (GRADE 2D).

CONCLUSIONS

This article is a translated summary of the full version of the ARDS Clinical Practice Guideline 2021 published in Japanese (URL: https://www.jsicm.org/publication/guideline.html ). The original text, which was written for Japanese healthcare professionals, may include different perspectives from healthcare professionals of other countries.

Early spontaneous breathing for acute respiratory distress syndrome in individuals with COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) represents the most severe course of COVID-19 (caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus), usually resulting in a prolonged stay in an intensive care unit (ICU) and high mortality rates. Despite the fact that most affected individuals need invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), evidence on specific ventilation strategies for ARDS caused by COVID-19 is scarce. Spontaneous breathing during IMV is part of a therapeutic concept comprising light levels of sedation and the avoidance of neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA). This approach is potentially associated with both advantages (e.g. a preserved diaphragmatic motility and an optimised ventilation-perfusion ratio of the ventilated lung), as well as risks (e.g. a higher rate of ventilator-induced lung injury or a worsening of pulmonary oedema due to increases in transpulmonary pressure). As a consequence, spontaneous breathing in people with COVID-19-ARDS who are receiving IMV is subject to an ongoing debate amongst intensivists.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of early spontaneous breathing activity in invasively ventilated people with COVID-19 with ARDS compared to ventilation strategies that avoid spontaneous breathing.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register (which includes CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, Clinical Trials.gov WHO ICTRP, and medRxiv) and the WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease to identify completed and ongoing studies from their inception to 2 March 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligible study designs comprised randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated spontaneous breathing in participants with COVID-19-related ARDS compared to ventilation strategies that avoided spontaneous breathing (e.g. using NMBA or deep sedation levels). Additionally, we considered controlled before-after studies, interrupted time series with comparison group, prospective cohort studies and retrospective cohort studies. For these non-RCT studies, we considered a minimum total number of 50 participants to be compared as necessary for inclusion. Prioritised outcomes were all-cause mortality, clinical improvement or worsening, quality of life, rate of (serious) adverse events and rate of pneumothorax. Additional outcomes were need for tracheostomy, duration of ICU length of stay and duration of hospitalisation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed the methods outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Two review authors independently screened all studies at the title/abstract and full-text screening stage. We also planned to conduct data extraction and risk of bias assessment in duplicate. We planned to conduct meta-analysis for each prioritised outcome, as well as subgroup analyses of mortality regarding severity of oxygenation impairment and duration of ARDS. In addition, we planned to perform sensitivity analyses for studies at high risk of bias, studies using NMBA in addition to deep sedation level to avoid spontaneous breathing and a comparison of preprints versus peer-reviewed articles. We planned to assess the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified no eligible studies for this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no direct evidence on whether early spontaneous breathing in SARS-CoV-2-induced ARDS is beneficial or detrimental to this particular group of patients.  RCTs comparing early spontaneous breathing with ventilatory strategies not allowing for spontaneous breathing in SARS-CoV-2-induced ARDS are necessary to determine its value within the treatment of severely ill people with COVID-19. Additionally, studies should aim to clarify whether treatment effects differ between people with SARS-CoV-2-induced ARDS and people with non-SARS-CoV-2-induced ARDS.

Safety, efficacy and biomarkers analysis of mesenchymal stromal cells therapy in ARDS: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on phase I and II RCTs

Background

Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) therapy for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is an emerging treatment, but most of the current trials of MSCs stay in the animal experimental stage, and the safety and efficacy of MSCs in clinical application are not clear. We aimed to analyze the safety, efficacy and biomarkers of mesenchymal stromal cells in the treatment of ARDS.

Methods

For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of science, CNKI, VIP and Wan Fang data, studies published between database inception and Mar 17, 2022. All randomized controlled trials (RCT) of stem cell interventions for ARDS were included, without language or date restrictions. We did separate meta-analyses for mortality, subjects with adverse events (AEs) and subjects with serious adverse events (SAEs). Since the trials data are dichotomous outcomes, the odds ratio (OR) is adopted for meta-analysis. The quality of the evidence was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias tool.

Findings

In total, 5 trials involving 171 patients with ARDS were included in this meta-analysis. A total of 99 individuals were randomly assigned to receive MSCs treatment, and 72 were randomly assigned to receive placebo treatment. Treatment with MSCs appeared to increase the occurrence of adverse events, but this result was not statistically significant (OR, 1.58; 95%CI, 0.64–3.91; P = 0.32). The occurrence of serious adverse events was lower in the MSCs group than in the placebo group (OR, 0.57; 95%CI, 0.14–2.32; P = 0.43); there seems to be no significant difference between the two groups in terms of 28 days mortality (OR, 0.93; 95%CI, 0.45–1.89); oxygenation index and biomarkers showed a tendency to improve in treatment, but there was a lack of more statistically significant clinical evidence to support them.

Interpretation

Based on the current clinical trials, MSCs intervention has some safety for ARDS patients, but its effectiveness and predictive value of airspace biomarkers need to be determined by more large-scale, standard randomized controlled trials.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13287-022-02956-3.

ARDS clinical practice guideline 2021

BACKGROUND

The joint committee of the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine/Japanese Respiratory Society/Japanese Society of Respiratory Care Medicine on ARDS Clinical Practice Guideline has created and released the ARDS Clinical Practice Guideline 2021.

METHODS

The 2016 edition of the Clinical Practice Guideline covered clinical questions (CQs) that targeted only adults, but the present guideline includes 15 CQs for children in addition to 46 CQs for adults. As with the previous edition, we used a systematic review method with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system as well as a degree of recommendation determination method. We also conducted systematic reviews that used meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy and network meta-analyses as a new method.

RESULTS

Recommendations for adult patients with ARDS are described: we suggest against using serum C-reactive protein and procalcitonin levels to identify bacterial pneumonia as the underlying disease (GRADE 2D); we recommend limiting tidal volume to 4-8 mL/kg for mechanical ventilation (GRADE 1D); we recommend against managements targeting an excessively low SpO₂ (PaO₂) (GRADE 2D); we suggest against using transpulmonary pressure as a routine basis in positive end-expiratory pressure settings (GRADE 2B); we suggest implementing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for those with severe ARDS (GRADE 2B); we suggest against using high-dose steroids (GRADE 2C); and we recommend using low-dose steroids (GRADE 1B). The recommendations for pediatric patients with ARDS are as follows: we suggest against using non-invasive respiratory support (non-invasive positive pressure ventilation/high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy) (GRADE 2D); we suggest placing pediatric patients with moderate ARDS in the prone position (GRADE 2D); we suggest against routinely implementing NO inhalation therapy (GRADE 2C); and we suggest against implementing daily sedation interruption for pediatric patients with respiratory failure (GRADE 2D).

CONCLUSIONS

This article is a translated summary of the full version of the ARDS Clinical Practice Guideline 2021 published in Japanese (URL: https://www.jrs.or.jp/publication/jrs_guidelines/). The original text, which was written for Japanese healthcare professionals, may include different perspectives from healthcare professionals of other countries.

Time-Controlled Adaptive Ventilation Does Not Induce Hemodynamic Impairment in a Swine ARDS Model

Background

The current standard of care during severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is based on low tidal volume (VT) ventilation, at 6 mL/kg of predicted body weight. The time-controlled adaptive ventilation (TCAV) is an alternative strategy, based on specific settings of the airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) mode. Briefly, TCAV reduces lung injury, including: (1) an improvement in alveolar recruitment and homogeneity; (2) reduction in alveolar and alveolar duct micro-strain and stress-risers. TCAV can result in higher intra-thoracic pressures and thus impair hemodynamics resulting from heart-lung interactions. The objective of our study was to compare hemodynamics between TCAV and conventional protective ventilation in a porcine ARDS model.

Methods

In 10 pigs (63–73 kg), lung injury was induced by repeated bronchial saline lavages followed by 2 h of injurious ventilation. The animals were then randomized into two groups: (1) Conventional protective ventilation with a VT of 6 mL/kg and PEEP adjusted to a plateau pressure set between 28 and 30 cmH₂O; (2) TCAV group with P-high set between 27 and 29 cmH₂O, P-low at 0 cmH₂O, T-low adjusted to terminate at 75% of the expiratory flow peak, and T-high at 3–4 s, with I:E > 6:1.

Results

Both lung elastance and PaO₂:FiO₂ were consistent with severe ARDS after 2 h of injurious mechanical ventilation. There was no significant difference in systemic arterial blood pressure, pulmonary blood pressure or cardiac output between Conventional protective ventilation and TCAV. Levels of total PEEP were significantly higher in the TCAV group (p < 0.05). Driving pressure and lung elastance were significantly lower in the TCAV group (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

No hemodynamic adverse events were observed in the TCAV group compared as to the standard protective ventilation group in this swine ARDS model, and TCAV appeared to be beneficial to the respiratory system.

The Impact of Sample Size Misestimations on the Interpretation of ARDS Trials: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Indeterminate randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in ARDS may arise from sample size misspecification, leading to abandonment of efficacious therapies.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

If evidence exists for sample size misspecification in ARDS RCTs, has this led to rejection of potentially beneficial therapies? Does evidence exist for prognostic enrichment in RCTs using mortality as a primary outcome?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We identified 150 ARDS RCTs commencing recruitment after the 1994 American European Consensus Conference ARDS definition and published before October 31, 2020. We examined predicted-observed sample size, predicted-observed control event rate (CER), predicted-observed average treatment effect (ATE), and the relationship between observed CER and observed ATE for RCTs with mortality and nonmortality primary outcome measures. To quantify the strength of evidence, we used Bayesian-averaged meta-analysis, trial sequential analysis, and Bayes factors.

RESULTS

Only 84 of 150 RCTs (56.0%) reported sample size estimations. In RCTs with mortality as the primary outcome, CER was overestimated in 16 of 28 RCTs (57.1%). To achieve predicted ATE, interventions needed to prevent 40.8% of all deaths, compared with the original prediction of 29.3%. Absolute reduction in mortality ≥ 10% was observed in 5 of 28 RCTs (17.9%), but predicted in 21 of 28 RCTs (75%). For RCTs with mortality as the primary outcome, no association was found between observed CER and observed ATE (pooled OR: β = -0.04; 95% credible interval, -0.18 to 0.09). We identified three interventions that are not currently standard of care with a Bayesian-averaged effect size of > 0.20 and moderate strength of existing evidence: corticosteroids, airway pressure release ventilation, and noninvasive ventilation.

INTERPRETATION

Reporting of sample size estimations was inconsistent in ARDS RCTs, and misspecification of CER and ATE was common. Prognostic enrichment strategies in ARDS RCTs based on all-cause mortality are unlikely to be successful. Bayesian methods can be used to prioritize interventions for future effectiveness RCTs.

Managing Severe Hypoxic Respiratory Failure in COVID-19

Purpose of Review

Adult respiratory distress syndrome is a life-threatening complication from severe COVID-19 infection resulting in severe hypoxic respiratory failure. Strategies at improving oxygenation have evolved over the course of the pandemic.

Recent Findings

Although non-invasive respiratory support reduces the need for intubation, a significant number of patients with COVID-19 progress to invasive mechanical ventilation. Once intubated, a lung protective ventilation strategy should be employed that limits tidal volumes to 6 ml/kg of predicted body weight and employs sufficient positive end-expiratory pressure to maximize oxygen delivery while minimizing the fraction of inspired oxygen. Intermittent prone positioning is effective at improving survival, and there is a growing body of evidence that it can be safely performed in spontaneously breathing patients to reduce the need for invasive mechanical ventilation. Inhaled pulmonary vasodilators have not been shown to improve survival or cost-effectiveness in COVID-19 and should be used selectively.

Summary

Finally, the best outcomes are likely achieved at centers with experience at severe ARDS management and protocols for escalation of care.

Airway Pressure Release Ventilation With Time-Controlled Adaptive Ventilation (TCAV™) in COVID-19: A Community Hospital's Experience

Santa Cabrini Ospedale, a community hospital in Montreal, Canada, used the airway pressure release ventilation following a time-controlled adaptive ventilation (APRV-TCAV™) approach for several patients in the first wave of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in the spring of 2021. Based on favorable patient responses, it became the primary mode of invasive mechanical ventilation—from initiation through extubation—during the second and third waves of COVID-19. In this article, we describe our success with APRV-TCAV™ over more conventional modes and protocols and look at three cases that aptly demonstrate our experience. We then outline several risks with our approach and the lessons learned from our experience. While we generally saw improvement in patients’ clinical course with APRV-TCAV™, there are inherent risks with this approach that others must prepare for if they attempt to implement it in their practice.

Validation of at-the-bedside formulae for estimating ventilator driving pressure during airway pressure release ventilation using computer simulation

BACKGROUND

Airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) is widely available on mechanical ventilators and has been proposed as an early intervention to prevent lung injury or as a rescue therapy in the management of refractory hypoxemia. Driving pressure ([Formula: see text]) has been identified in numerous studies as a key indicator of ventilator-induced-lung-injury that needs to be carefully controlled. [Formula: see text] delivered by the ventilator in APRV is not directly measurable in dynamic conditions, and there is no "gold standard" method for its estimation.

METHODS

We used a computational simulator matched to data from 90 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) to evaluate the accuracy of three "at-the-bedside" methods for estimating ventilator [Formula: see text] during APRV.

RESULTS

Levels of [Formula: see text] delivered by the ventilator in APRV were generally within safe limits, but in some cases exceeded levels specified by protective ventilation strategies. A formula based on estimating the intrinsic positive end expiratory pressure present at the end of the APRV release provided the most accurate estimates of [Formula: see text]. A second formula based on assuming that expiratory flow, volume and pressure decay mono-exponentially, and a third method that requires temporarily switching to volume-controlled ventilation, also provided accurate estimates of true [Formula: see text].

CONCLUSIONS

Levels of [Formula: see text] delivered by the ventilator during APRV can potentially exceed levels specified by standard protective ventilation strategies, highlighting the need for careful monitoring. Our results show that [Formula: see text] delivered by the ventilator during APRV can be accurately estimated at the bedside using simple formulae that are based on readily available measurements.

Use of Airway Pressure Release Ventilation in Patients With Acute Respiratory Failure Due to COVID-19: Results of a Single-Center Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

Airway pressure release ventilation is a ventilatory mode characterized by a mandatory inverse inspiratory:expiratory ratio with a very short expiratory phase, aimed to avoid derecruitment and allow spontaneous breathing. Recent basic and clinical evidence suggests that this mode could be associated with improved outcomes in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes between airway pressure release ventilation and traditional ventilation targeting low tidal volume, in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019.

DESIGN

Single-center randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

ICU of a Mexican referral center dedicated to care of patients with confirmed diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019.

PATIENTS

Ninety adult intubated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome associated with severe coronavirus disease 2019.

INTERVENTIONS

Within 48 hours after intubation, patients were randomized to either receive ventilatory management with airway pressure release ventilation or continue low tidal volume ventilation.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Forty-five patients in airway pressure release ventilation group and 45 in the low tidal volume group were included. Ventilator-free days were 3.7 (0-15) and 5.2 (0-19) in the airway pressure release ventilation and low tidal volume groups, respectively (p = 0.28). During the first 7 days, patients in airway pressure release ventilation had a higher Pao2/Fio2 (mean difference, 26 [95%CI, 13-38]; p < 0.001) and static compliance (mean difference, 3.7 mL/cm H2O [95% CI, 0.2-7.2]; p = 0.03), higher mean airway pressure (mean difference, 3.1 cm H2O [95% CI, 2.1-4.1]; p < 0.001), and higher tidal volume (mean difference, 0.76 mL/kg/predicted body weight [95% CI, 0.5-1.0]; p < 0.001). More patients in airway pressure release ventilation had transient severe hypercapnia, defined as an elevation of Pco2 at greater than or equal to 55 along with a pH less than 7.15 (42% vs 15%; p = 0.009); other outcomes were similar. Overall mortality was 69%, with no difference between the groups (78% in airway pressure release ventilation vs 60% in low tidal volume; p = 0.07).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, when compared with low tidal volume, airway pressure release ventilation was not associated with more ventilator-free days or improvement in other relevant outcomes in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019.

Effects of Prone Positioning for Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Caused by Pulmonary Contusion: A Single-Center Retrospective Study

Background. The effects of prone positioning (PP) on patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) caused by pulmonary contusion (PC) are unclear. We sought to determine the efficacy of PP among patients whose ARDS was caused by PC. Methods. A retrospective observational study was performed at an intensive care unit (ICU) from January 2017 to June 2021. ARDS patients with PaO2/FiO2 (P/F) < 150 mmHg were enrolled. During the study period, we enrolled 121 patients in the PP group and 117 in the control group. The changes in vital signs, laboratory tests, and compliance of the respiratory system (Crs) were recorded for 3 consecutive days. The mechanical ventilation time, duration of ICU stay, complications, extubation rate, 28-day ventilator-free days, and mortality were also recorded. Results. In the PP group, the P/F and Crs increased over time. Compared to the control group, the P/F and Crs improved in the PP group over 3 consecutive days ( $P<0.05$ ). Furthermore, the PP group also had shorter total mechanical ventilation time (5.1 ± 1.4 vs. 9.3 ± 3.1 days, $P<0.05$ ) and invasive ventilation time (4.9 ± 1.2 vs. 8.7 ± 2.7 days, $P<0.05$ ), shorter ICU stay (7.4 ± 1.8 vs. 11.5 ± 3.6days, $P<0.05$ ), higher extubation rate (95.6% vs. 84.4%, $P<0.05$ ), less atelectasis (15 vs. 74, $P<0.05$ ) and pneumothorax (17 vs. 24, $P>0.05$ ), more 28-day ventilator-free days (21.6 ± 5.2 vs. 16.2 ± 7.2 days, $P<0.05$ ), and lower mortality (4.4% vs. 13.3%, $P<0.05$ ). Conclusions. Among PC cases with moderate to severe ARDS, PP can correct hypoxemia more quickly, improve Crs, reduce atelectasis, increase the extubation rate, shorten mechanical ventilation time and length of ICU stay, and reduce mortality.