A high positive end-expiratory pressure, low tidal volume ventilatory strategy improves outcome in persistent acute respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized, controlled trial

Noninvasive Surrogate for Physiologic Dead Space Using the Carbon Dioxide Ventilatory Equivalent: Testing in a Single-Center Cohort, 2017-2023

OBJECTIVES

We sought to evaluate the association between the carbon dioxide ( co2 ) ventilatory equivalent (VEq co2 = minute ventilation/volume of co2 produced per min), a marker of dead space that does not require a blood gas measurement, and mortality risk. We compared the strength of this association to that of physiologic dead space fraction (V D /V t = [Pa co2 -mixed-expired P co2 ]/Pa co2 ) as well as to other commonly used markers of dead space (i.e., the end-tidal alveolar dead space fraction [AVDSf = (Pa co2 -end-tidal P co2 )/Pa co2 ], and ventilatory ratio [VR = (minute ventilation × Pa co2 )/(age-adjusted predicted minute ventilation × 37.5)]).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort data, 2017-2023.

SETTING

Quaternary PICU.

PATIENTS

One hundred thirty-one children with acute respiratory distress syndrome.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

All dead space markers were calculated at the same 1-minute timepoint for each patient within the first 72 hours of using invasive mechanical ventilation. The 131 children had a median (interquartile range, IQR) age of 5.8 (IQR 1.4, 12.6) years, oxygenation index (OI) of 7.5 (IQR 4.6, 14.3), V D /V t of 0.47 (IQR 0.38, 0.61), and mortality was 17.6% (23/131). Higher VEq co2 ( p = 0.003), V D /V t ( p = 0.002), and VR ( p = 0.013) were all associated with greater odds of mortality in multivariable models adjusting for OI, immunosuppressive comorbidity, and overall severity of illness. We failed to identify an association between AVDSf and mortality in the multivariable modeling. Similarly, we also failed to identify an association between OI and mortality after controlling for any dead space marker in the modeling. For the 28-day ventilator-free days outcome, we failed to identify an association between V D /V t and the dead space markers in multivariable modeling, although OI was significant.

CONCLUSIONS

VEq co2 performs similarly to V D /V t and other surrogate dead space markers, is independently associated with mortality risk, and may be a reasonable noninvasive surrogate for V D /V t .

Progress in the relationship between mechanical ventilation parameters and ventilator-related complications during perioperative anesthesia

BACKGROUND

Mechanical ventilation, as an important respiratory support, plays an important role in general anesthesia and it is the cornerstone of intraoperative management of surgical patients. Different from spontaneous respiration, intraoperative mechanical ventilation can lead to postoperative lung injury, and its impact on surgical mortality cannot be ignored. Postoperative lung injury increases hospital stay and is related to preoperative conditions, anesthesia time, and intraoperative ventilation settings.

METHOD

Through reading literature and research reports, the relationship between perioperative input parameters and output parameters related to mechanical ventilation and ventilator-related complications was reviewed, providing reference for the subsequent setting of input parameters of mechanical ventilation and new ventilation strategies.

RESULTS

The parameters of inspiratory pressure rise time and inspiratory time can change the gas distribution, gas flow rate and airway pressure into the lungs, but there are few clinical studies on them. It can be used as a prospective intervention to study the effect of specific protective ventilation strategies on pulmonary complications after perioperative anesthesia.

CONCLUSION

There are many factors affecting lung function after perioperative mechanical ventilation. Due to the difference of human body, the ventilation parameters suitable for each patient are different, and the deviation of each ventilation parameter can lead to postoperative pulmonary complications. Inspiratory pressure rise time and inspiratory time will be used as the new ventilation strategy.

Hemodynamic effects of positive end-expiratory pressure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) is required in the Berlin definition of acute respiratory distress syndrome and is a cornerstone of its treatment. Application of PEEP increases airway pressure and modifies pleural and transpulmonary pressures according to respiratory mechanics, resulting in blood volume alteration into the pulmonary circulation. This can in turn affect right ventricular preload, afterload and function. At the opposite, PEEP may improve left ventricular function, providing no deleterious effect occurs on the right ventricle.

RECENT FINDINGS

This review examines the impact of PEEP on cardiac function with regards to heart-lung interactions, and describes its consequences on organs perfusion and function, including the kidney, gut, liver and the brain. PEEP in itself is not beneficious nor detrimental on end-organ hemodynamics, but its hemodynamic effects vary according to both respiratory mechanics and association with other hemodynamic variables such as central venous or mean arterial pressure. There are parallels in the means of preventing deleterious impact of PEEP on the lungs, heart, kidney, liver and central nervous system.

SUMMARY

The quest for optimal PEEP settings has been a prominent goal in ARDS research for the last decades. Intensive care physician must maintain a high degree of vigilance towards hemodynamic effects of PEEP on cardiac function and end-organs circulation.

Multicentre, parallel, open-label, two-arm, randomised controlled trial on the prognosis of electrical impedance tomography-guided versus low PEEP/FiO2 table-guided PEEP setting: a trial protocol

INTRODUCTION

Previous studies suggested that electrical impedance tomography (EIT) has the potential to guide positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) titration via quantifying the alveolar collapse and overdistension. The aim of this trial is to compare the effect of EIT-guided PEEP and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) network low PEEP/fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) table strategy on mortality and other clinical outcomes in patients with ARDS.

METHODS

This is a parallel, two-arm, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial, conducted in China. All patients with ARDS under mechanical ventilation admitted to the intensive care unit will be screened for eligibility. The enrolled patients are stratified by the aetiology (pulmonary/extrapulmonary) and partial pressure of arterial oxygen/FiO2 (≥150 mm Hg or <150 mm Hg) and randomised into the intervention group or the control group. The intervention group will receive recruitment manoeuvre and EIT-guided PEEP titration. The EIT-guided PEEP will be set for at least 12 hours after titration. The control group will not receive recruitment manoeuvre routinely and the PEEP will be set according to the lower PEEP/FiO2 table proposed by the ARDS Network. The primary outcome is 28-day survival.

ANALYSIS

Qualitative data will be analysed using the χ2 test or Fisher's exact test, quantitative data will be analysed using independent samples t-test or Mann-Whitney U test. Kaplan-Meier analysis with log-rank test will be used to evaluate the 28-day survival rate between two groups. All outcomes will be analysed based on the intention-to-treat principle.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial is approved by the Institutional Research and Ethics Committee of the Peking Union Medical College Hospital. Data will be published in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05307913.

Setting positive end-expiratory pressure: using the pressure-volume curve

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To discuss the role of pressure-volume curve (PV curve) in exploring elastic properties of the respiratory system and setting mechanical ventilator to reduce ventilator-induced lung injury.

RECENT FINDINGS

Nowadays, quasi-static PV curves and loops can be easily obtained and analyzed at the bedside without disconnection of the patient from the ventilator. It is shown that this tool can provide useful information to optimize ventilator setting. For example, PV curves can assess for patient's individual potential for lung recruitability and also evaluate the risk for lung injury of the ongoing mechanical ventilation setting.

SUMMARY

In conclusion, PV curve is an easily available bedside tool: its correct interpretation can be extremely valuable to enlighten potential for lung recruitability and select a high or low positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) strategy. Furthermore, recent studies have shown that PV curve can play a significant role in PEEP and driving pressure fine tuning: clinical studies are needed to prove whether this technique will improve outcome.

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.

Visualizing the dynamic mechanical power and time burden of mechanical ventilation patients: an analysis of the MIMIC-IV database

BACKGROUND

Limiting driving pressure and mechanical power is associated with reduced mortality risk in both patients with and without acute respiratory distress syndrome. However, it is still poorly understood how the intensity of mechanical ventilation and its corresponding duration impact the risk of mortality.

METHODS

Critically ill patients who received mechanical ventilation were identified from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC)-IV database. A visualization method was developed by calculating the odds ratio of survival for all combinations of ventilation duration and intensity to assess the relationship between the intensity and duration of mechanical ventilation and the mortality risk.

RESULTS

A total of 6251 patients were included. The color-coded plot demonstrates the intuitive concept that episodes of higher dynamic mechanical power can only be tolerated for shorter durations. The three fitting contour lines represent 0%, 10%, and 20% increments in the mortality risk, respectively, and exhibit an exponential pattern: higher dynamic mechanical power is associated with an increased mortality risk with shorter exposure durations.

CONCLUSIONS

Cumulative exposure to higher intensities and/or longer duration of mechanical ventilation is associated with worse outcomes. Considering both the intensity and duration of mechanical ventilation may help evaluate patient outcomes and guide adjustments in mechanical ventilation to minimize harmful exposure.

Secondary analysis of preoperative predictors for acute postoperative exacerbation in interstitial lung disease

This study assessed whether perioperative management is associated with postoperative acute exacerbations (AEs) in interstitial lung disease (ILD) patients. Using secondary data from the study "Postoperative acute exacerbation of interstitial lung disease: a case-control study," we compared the perioperative clinical management of the AE and non-AE groups (1:4 case-control matching) selected by sex, year of surgery (2009-2011, 2012-2014, and 2015-2017), and multiple surgeries within 30 days. We compared 27 and 108 patients with and without AEs, respectively. Rates of one lung ventilation (OLV) cases (70 vs. 29%; OR, 5.9; 95%CI, 2.34-14.88; p < 0.001) and intraoperative steroid administration (48 vs. 26%; OR, 2.65; 95%CI, 1.11-6.33; p = 0.028), and average mean inspiratory pressure (9.2 [1.8] vs. 8.3 [1.7] cmH2O; OR, 1.36; 95%CI, 1.04-1.79; p = 0.026), were significantly higher in the AE group. There was a significant difference in OLV between the groups (OR, 4.99; 95%CI, 1.90-13.06; p = 0.001). However, the fraction of inspired oxygen  > 0.8 lasting > 1 min (63 vs. 73%, p = 0.296) was not significantly different between the groups. OLV was significantly associated with postoperative AEs in patients with ILD undergoing both pulmonary and non-pulmonary surgeries. Thus, preoperative risk considerations are more important in patients who require OLV.

Management of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome: a primer

This narrative review explores the physiology and evidence-based management of patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and refractory hypoxemia, with a focus on mechanical ventilation, adjunctive therapies, and veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO). Severe ARDS cases increased dramatically worldwide during the Covid-19 pandemic and carry a high mortality. The mainstay of treatment to improve survival and ventilator-free days is proning, conservative fluid management, and lung protective ventilation. Ventilator settings should be individualized when possible to improve patient-ventilator synchrony and reduce ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI). Positive end-expiratory pressure can be individualized by titrating to best respiratory system compliance, or by using advanced methods, such as electrical impedance tomography or esophageal manometry. Adjustments to mitigate high driving pressure and mechanical power, two possible drivers of VILI, may be further beneficial. In patients with refractory hypoxemia, salvage modes of ventilation such as high frequency oscillatory ventilation and airway pressure release ventilation are additional options that may be appropriate in select patients. Adjunctive therapies also may be applied judiciously, such as recruitment maneuvers, inhaled pulmonary vasodilators, neuromuscular blockers, or glucocorticoids, and may improve oxygenation, but do not clearly reduce mortality. In select, refractory cases, the addition of V-V ECMO improves gas exchange and modestly improves survival by allowing for lung rest. In addition to VILI, patients with severe ARDS are at risk for complications including acute cor pulmonale, physical debility, and neurocognitive deficits. Even among the most severe cases, ARDS is a heterogeneous disease, and future studies are needed to identify ARDS subgroups to individualize therapies and advance care.

ESICM guidelines on acute respiratory distress syndrome: definition, phenotyping and respiratory support strategies

The aim of these guidelines is to update the 2017 clinical practice guideline (CPG) of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM). The scope of this CPG is limited to adult patients and to non-pharmacological respiratory support strategies across different aspects of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), including ARDS due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). These guidelines were formulated by an international panel of clinical experts, one methodologist and patients' representatives on behalf of the ESICM. The review was conducted in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement recommendations. We followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess the certainty of evidence and grade recommendations and the quality of reporting of each study based on the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) network guidelines. The CPG addressed 21 questions and formulates 21 recommendations on the following domains: (1) definition; (2) phenotyping, and respiratory support strategies including (3) high-flow nasal cannula oxygen (HFNO); (4) non-invasive ventilation (NIV); (5) tidal volume setting; (6) positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and recruitment maneuvers (RM); (7) prone positioning; (8) neuromuscular blockade, and (9) extracorporeal life support (ECLS). In addition, the CPG includes expert opinion on clinical practice and identifies the areas of future research.

Evaluation of adherence with lung-protective ventilator strategies in moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome in a tertiary care setup in India: A prospective observational study

Background

Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of mechanical ventilation settings is a cornerstone of the early phase of the management of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). This study aimed to evaluate the adherence to currently recommended lung-protective ventilator strategies (tidal volume, plateau pressure, driving pressure, prone positioning, and positive end-expiratory pressure [PEEP]) for adults with moderate-to-severe ARDS in a tertiary care setup, thereby evaluating if lung-protective ventilation is associated with improved outcomes.

Methods

This was an observational study over 1 year in ventilated moderate-to-severe ARDS participants. All participants were mechanically ventilated when required using the protocol followed by the ARDS Network low-tidal volume lung-protective ventilation strategy and monitored.

Results

The total number of participants in the study was 32. Septic shock was the most common cause of ARDS. The mean duration of intensive care unit (ICU) stay was 6.13 (±5.4) days, mean ventilator days were 3.66 (±3.75) days and mortality rate of 71.8%.Adherence to low-tidal volume was 78.12% with an improvement of 36% in the adherent group (P = 0.06). Adherence to high PEEP was 34.38% with a survival of 73% in the adherent group (P = 0.0004). Adherence to prone ventilation was 18.75% with a survival of 33% in the adherent group (P = 0.7).

Conclusion

Intensivists should take an extra effort to focus on evidence-based ventilator strategies and increase adherence to these recommendations in their ICUs to improve patient survival.

Lung morphology impacts the association between ventilatory variables and mortality in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome

BACKGROUND

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients with different lung morphology have distinct pulmonary mechanical dysfunction and outcomes. Whether lung morphology impacts the association between ventilatory variables and mortality remains unclear. Moreover, the impact of a novel combined ventilator variable [(4×DP) + RR] on morality in ARDS patients needs external validation.

METHODS

We obtained data from the Chinese Database in Intensive Care (CDIC), which included adult ARDS patients who received invasive mechanical ventilation for at least 24 h. Patients were further classified into two groups based on lung morphology (focal and non-focal). Ventilatory variables were collected longitudinally within the first four days of ventilation. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Extended Cox regression models were employed to explore the interaction between lung morphology and longitudinal ventilatory variables on mortality.

FINDINGS

We included 396 ARDS patients with different lung morphology (64.1% non-focal). The overall 28-day mortality was 34.4%. Patients with non-focal lung morphology have more severe and persistent pulmonary mechanical dysfunction and higher mortality than those with focal lung morphology. Time-varying driving pressure (DP) was more significantly associated with 28-day mortality in patients with non-focal lung morphology compared to focal lung morphology patients (P for interaction = 0.0039). The impact of DP on mortality was more significant than that of respiratory rate (RR) only in patients with non-focal lung morphology. The hazard ratio (HR) of mortality for [(4×DP) + RR] was significant in patients with non-focal lung morphology (HR 1.036, 95% CI 1.027-1.045), not in patients with focal lung morphology (HR 1.019, 95% CI 0.999-1.039).

INTERPRETATION

The association between ventilator variables and mortality varied among patients with different lung morphology. [(4×DP) + RR] was only associated with mortality in patients with non-focal lung morphology. Further validation is needed.

Mortality As a Measure of Treatment Effect in Clinical Trials Recruiting Critically Ill Patients

OBJECTIVES

All-cause mortality is a common measure of treatment effect in ICU-based randomized clinical trials (RCTs). We sought to understand the performance characteristics of a mortality endpoint by evaluating its temporal course, responsiveness to differential treatment effects, and impact when used as an outcome measure in trials of acute illness.

DATA SOURCES

We searched OVID Medline for RCTs published from 1990 to 2018.

STUDY SELECTION

We reviewed RCTs that had randomized greater than or equal to 100 patients, were published in one of five high-impact general medical or eight critical care journals, and reported mortality at two or more distinct time points. We excluded trials recruiting pediatric or neonatal patients and cluster RCTs.

DATA EXTRACTION

Mortality by randomization group was recorded from the article or estimated from survival curves. Trial impact was assessed by inclusion of results in clinical practice guidelines.

DATA SYNTHESIS

From 2,592 potentially eligible trials, we included 343 RCTs (228,784 adult patients). While one third of all deaths by 180 days had occurred by day 7, the risk difference between study arms continued to increase until day 60 (p = 0.01) and possibly day 90 (p = 0.07) and remained stable thereafter. The number of deaths at ICU discharge approximated those at 28-30 days (95% [interquartile range [IQR], 86-106%]), and deaths at hospital discharge approximated those at 60 days (99% [IQR, 94-104%]). Only 13 of 43 interventions (30.2%) showing a mortality benefit have been adopted into widespread clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings provide a conceptual framework for choosing a time horizon and interpreting mortality outcome in trials of acute illness. Differential mortality effects persist for 60 to 90 days following recruitment. Location-based measures approximate time-based measures for trials conducted outside the United States. The documentation of a mortality reduction has had a modest impact on practice.

Personalized medicine targeting different ARDS phenotypes: The future of pharmacotherapy for ARDS?

INTRODUCTION

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) still represents a major challenge with high mortality rates and altered quality of life. Many well-designed studies have failed to improve ARDS outcomes. Heterogeneity of etiologies, mechanisms of lung damage, different lung mechanics, and different treatment approaches may explain these failures. At the era of personalized medicine, ARDS phenotyping is not only a field of research, but a bedside consideration when implementing therapy. ARDS has moved from being a simple syndrome to a more complex area of subgrouping. Intensivists must understand these phenotypes and therapies associated with a better outcome.

AREAS COVERED

After a brief sum-up of the different type of ARDS phenotypes, we will present some relevant therapy that may be impacted by phenotyping. A focus on pharmacotherapy will be realized before a section on non-pharmaceutical strategies. Eventually, we will highlight the limits of our knowledge of phenotyping and the pitfalls of personalized medicine.

EXPERT OPINION

Biological and morphological ARDS phenotypes are now well studied. The future of ARDS therapy will go through phenotyping that allows a personalized medication for each patient. However, a better assessment of these phenotypes is required, and clinical trials should be conducted with an ad-hoc phenotyping before randomization.

Mortality associated with acute respiratory distress syndrome, 2009-2019: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) occurs commonly in intensive care units. The reported mortality rates in studies evaluating ARDS are highly variable. Objective: To investigate mortality rates due to ARDS from before the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic began until the start of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Design: We performed a systematic search and then ran a proportional meta-analysis for mortality. We ran our analysis in three ways: for randomised controlled trials only, for observational studies only, and for randomised controlled trials and observational studies combined. Data sources: MEDLINE and Embase, using a highly sensitive criterion and limiting the search to studies published from January 2009 to December 2019. Review methods: Two of us independently screened titles and abstracts to first identify studies and then complete full text reviews of selected studies. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB-2 (a risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials) and the Cochrane ROBINS-1 (a risk-of-bias tool for non-randomised studies of interventions). Results: We screened 5844 citations, of which 102 fully met our inclusion criteria. These included 34 randomised controlled trials and 68 observational studies, with a total of 24 158 patients. The weighted pooled mortality rate for all 102 studies published from 2009 to 2019 was 39.4% (95% CI, 37.0-41.8%). Mortality was higher in observational studies compared with randomised controlled trials (41.8% [95% CI, 38.9-44.8%] v 34.5% [95% CI, 30.6-38.5%]; P = 0.005). Conclusions: Over the past decade, mortality rates due to ARDS were high. There is a clear distinction between mortality in observational studies and in randomised controlled trials. Future studies need to report mortality for different ARDS phenotypes and closely adhere to evidence-based medicine. PROSPERO registration: CRD42020149712 (April 2020).

Impact of Time-Varying Intensity of Mechanical Ventilation on 28-Day Mortality Depends on Fluid Balance in Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

Recent studies have mainly focused on the association between baseline intensity of mechanical ventilation (driving pressure or mechanical power) and mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). It is unclear whether the association between the time-varying intensity of mechanical ventilation and mortality is significant and varies according to the fluid balance trajectories.

Methods

We conducted a secondary analysis based on the NHLBI ARDS Network’s Fluid and Catheter Treatment Trial (FACTT). The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. The group-based trajectory modeling (GBTM) was employed to identify phenotypes based on fluid balance trajectories. Bayesian joint models were used to account for informative censoring due to death during follow-up.

Results

A total of 1,000 patients with ARDS were included in the analysis. Our study identified two phenotypes of ARDS, and compared patients with Early Negative Fluid Balance (Early NFB) and patients with Persistent-Positive Fluid Balance (Persistent-PFB) accompanied by higher tidal volume, higher static driving pressure, higher mechanical power, and lower PaO₂/FiO₂, over time during mechanical ventilation. The 28-day mortality was 14.8% in Early NFB and 49.6% in Persistent-PFB (p < 0.001). In the Bayesian joint models, the hazard ratio (HR) of 28-day death for time-varying static driving pressure [HR 1.03 (95% CI 1.01–1.05; p < 0.001)] and mechanical power [HR 1.01 (95% CI 1.002–1.02; p = 0.01)] was significant in patients with Early NFB, but not in patients with Persistent-PFB.

Conclusion

Time-varying intensity of mechanical ventilation was associated with a 28-day mortality of ARDS in a patient with Early NFB but not in patients with Persistent-PFB.

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.

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.

Usefulness of low tidal volume ventilation strategy for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The effects of lower tidal volume ventilation (LTV) were controversial for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the use of LTV strategy in patients with ARDS. We performed a literature search on MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, CINAHL, "Igaku-Chuo-Zasshi", clinical trial registration sites, and the reference of recent guidelines. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the LTV strategy with the higher tidal volume ventilation (HTV) strategy in patients with ARDS. Two authors independently evaluated the eligibility of studies and extracted the data. The primary outcomes were 28-day mortality. We used the GRADE methodology to assess the certainty of evidence. Among the 19,864 records screened, 13 RCTs that recruited 1874 patients were included in our meta-analysis. When comparing LTV (4-8 ml/kg) versus HTV (> 8 ml/kg), the pooled risk ratio for 28-day mortality was 0.79 (11 studies, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66-0.94, I2 = 43%, n = 1795, moderate certainty of evidence). Subgroup-analysis by combined high positive end-expiratory pressure with LTV showed interaction (P = 0.01). Our study indicated that ventilation with LTV was associated with reduced risk of mortality in patients with ARDS when compared with HTV. Trial registration: UMIN-CTR (UMIN000041071).

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.

Current Development of Nano-Drug Delivery to Target Macrophages

Macrophages are the most important innate immune cells that participate in various inflammation-related diseases. Therefore, macrophage-related pathological processes are essential targets in the diagnosis and treatment of diseases. Since nanoparticles (NPs) can be preferentially taken up by macrophages, NPs have attracted most attention for specific macrophage-targeting. In this review, the interactions between NPs and the immune system are introduced to help understand the pharmacokinetics and biodistribution of NPs in immune cells. The current design and strategy of NPs modification for specific macrophage-targeting are investigated and summarized.

Differential Prognostic Analysis of Higher and Lower PEEP in ARDS Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) refers to the positive pressure in the respiratory tract at the end of the exhalation when we use a ventilator. The differences of higher PEEP and lower PEEP on clinical outcomes in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients are less well known.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search of all randomized control trials (RCTs) was conducted using PubMed, Embase, World Health Organization (WHO) Global Index Medicus, WHO clinical trial registry, and Clinicaltrials.gov. Inclusion criteria included RCTs comparing the clinical outcomes of higher and lower PEEP in ARDS patients.

Results

Eleven studies were included in the final analysis. In the higher PEEP group, the hospital mortality, 28-day mortality, and ICU mortality showed no significantly lower risk compared to the lower PEEP group (RR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.80-1.05, p = 0.22; RR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.73-1.05, p = 0.15; RR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.67-1.05, p = 0.12; respectively). High certainty could be obtained that there is no significant difference between the clinical outcomes of higher PEEP and lower PEEP in ARDS patients.

Conclusions

There is no significant difference of the hospital mortality, 28-day mortality, and ICU mortality between higher and lower PEEP in ARDS patients.

Stochastic integrated model-based protocol for volume-controlled ventilation setting

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Mechanical ventilation (MV) is the primary form of care for respiratory failure patients. MV settings are based on general clinical guidelines, intuition, and experience. This approach is not patient-specific and patients may thus experience suboptimal, potentially harmful MV care. This study presents the Stochastic integrated VENT (SiVENT) protocol which combines model-based approaches of the VENT protocol from previous works, with stochastic modelling to take the variation of patient respiratory elastance over time into consideration.

METHODS

A stochastic model of Ers is integrated into the VENT protocol from previous works to develop the SiVENT protocol, to account for both intra- and inter-patient variability. A cohort of 20 virtual MV patients based on retrospective patient data are used to validate the performance of this method for volume-controlled (VC) ventilation. A performance evaluation was conducted where the SiVENT and VENT protocols were implemented in 1080 instances each to compare the two protocols and evaluate the difference in reduction of possible MV settings achieved by each.

RESULTS

From an initial number of 189,000 possible MV setting combinations, the VENT protocol reduced this number to a median of 10,612, achieving a reduction of 94.4% across the cohort. With the integration of the stochastic model component, the SiVENT protocol reduced this number from 189,000 to a median of 9329, achieving a reduction of 95.1% across the cohort. The SiVENT protocol reduces the number of possible combinations provided to the user by more than 1000 combinations as compared to the VENT protocol.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding a stochastic model component into a model-based approach to selecting MV settings improves the ability of a decision support system to recommend patient-specific MV settings. It specifically considers inter- and intra-patient variability in respiratory elastance and eliminates potentially harmful settings based on clinically recommended pressure thresholds. Clinical input and local protocols can further reduce the number of safe setting combinations. The results for the SiVENT protocol justify further investigation of its prediction accuracy and clinical validation trials.

Stochastic Modelling of Respiratory System Elastance for Mechanically Ventilated Respiratory Failure Patients

While lung protective mechanical ventilation (MV) guidelines have been developed to avoid ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI), a one-size-fits-all approach cannot benefit every individual patient. Hence, there is significant need for the ability to provide patient-specific MV settings to ensure safety, and optimise patient care. Model-based approaches enable patient-specific care by identifying time-varying patient-specific parameters, such as respiratory elastance, Ers, to capture inter- and intra-patient variability. However, patient-specific parameters evolve with time, as a function of disease progression and patient condition, making predicting their future values crucial for recommending patient-specific MV settings. This study employs stochastic modelling to predict future Ers values using retrospective patient data to develop and validate a model indicating future intra-patient variability of Ers. Cross validation results show stochastic modelling can predict future elastance ranges with 92.59 and 68.56% of predicted values within the 5-95% and the 25-75% range, respectively. This range can be used to ensure patients receive adequate minute ventilation should elastance rise and minimise the risk of VILI should elastance fall. The results show the potential for model-based protocols using stochastic model prediction of future Ers values to provide safe and patient-specific MV. These results warrant further investigation to validate its clinical utility.

COVID-19 pandemic: overview of protective-ventilation strategy in ARDS patients

Objectives: In the context of COVID-19 pandemic, the aim of this manuscript is to provide a standard of care of patients with ARDS for non-emergency medicine trained physicians who are not customary with mechanical ventilation.Methods: We conducted a systematic review of the literature to investigate the best practice recommendations regarding the mechanical ventilation of patients with ARDS.Conclusion: We summarized the principal strategies for lung-protective ventilation of patients with ARDS. This focus is particularly addressed to physicians who are not experienced in the invasive respiratory management of ARDS patients. Nevertheless, it remains fundamental to acknowledge that new insights concerning this quickly spreading illness become available on a regular base.

OLA strategy for ARDS: Its effect on mortality depends on achieved recruitment (PaO2/FiO2) and mechanical power. Systematic review and meta-analysis with meta-regression

OBJECTIVE

The "Open Lung Approach" (OLA), that includes high levels of positive end-expiratory pressure coupled with limited tidal volumes, is considered optimal for adult patients with ARDS. However, many previous meta-analyses have shown only marginal benefits of OLA on mortality but with statistical heterogeneity. It is crucial to identify the most likely moderators of this effect. To determine the effect of OLA strategy on mortality of ventilated ARDS patients. We hypothesized that the degree of recruitment achieved in the control group (PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio on day 3 of ventilation), and the difference in Mechanical Power (MP) or Driving Pressure (DP) between experimental and control groups will be the most likely sources of heterogeneity.

DESIGN

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis was performed according to PRISMA statement and registered in PROSPERO database. We searched only for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). GRADE guidelines were used for rating the quality of evidence. Publication bias was assessed. For the Meta-analysis, we used a Random Effects Model. Sources of heterogeneity were explored with Meta-Regression, using a priori proposed set of possible moderators. For model comparison, Akaike's Information Criterion with the finite sample correction (AICc) was used.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PATIENTS

Fourteen RCTs were included in the study.

INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

MAIN VARIABLES OF INTEREST

Not applicable.

RESULTS

Evidence of publication bias was detected, and quality of evidence was downgraded. Pooled analysis did not show a significant difference in the 28-day mortality between OLA strategy and control groups. Overall risk of bias was low. The analysis detected statistical heterogeneity. The two "best" explicative meta-regression models were those that used control PaO₂/FiO₂ on day 3 and difference in MP between experimental and control groups. The DP and MP models were highly correlated.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no clear benefit of OLA strategy on mortality of ARDS patients, with significant heterogeneity among RCTs. Mortality effect of OLA is mediated by lung recruitment and mechanical power.

Health Technology Assessment of Intensive Care Ventilators for Pediatric Patients

This paper is aimed at addressing all the critical aspects linked to the implementation of intensive care ventilators in a pediatric setting, highlighting the most relevant technical features and describing the methodology to conduct health technology assessment (HTA) for supporting the decision-making process. Four ventilator models were included in the assessment process. A decision-making support tool (DoHTA method) was applied. Twenty-eight Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) were identified, defining the safety, clinical effectiveness, organizational, technical, and economic aspects. The Performance scores of each ventilator have been measured with respect to KPIs integrated with the total cost of ownership analysis, leading to a final rank of the four possible technological solutions. The final technologies' performance scores reflected a deliver valued, contextualized, and shared outputs, detecting the most performant technological solution for the specific hospital context. HTA results had informed and supported the pediatric hospital decision-making process. This study, critically identifying the pros and cons of innovative features of ventilators and the evaluation criteria and aspects to be taken into account during HTA, can be considered as a valuable proof of evidence as well as a reliable and transferable method for conducting decision-making processes in a hospital context.

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020)

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020), a Japanese-specific set of clinical practice guidelines for sepsis and septic shock created as revised from J-SSCG 2016 jointly by the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine, was first released in September 2020 and published in February 2021. An English-language version of these guidelines was created based on the contents of the original Japanese-language version. The purpose of this guideline is to assist medical staff in making appropriate decisions to improve the prognosis of patients undergoing treatment for sepsis and septic shock. We aimed to provide high-quality guidelines that are easy to use and understand for specialists, general clinicians, and multidisciplinary medical professionals. J-SSCG 2016 took up new subjects that were not present in SSCG 2016 (e.g., ICU-acquired weakness [ICU-AW], post-intensive care syndrome [PICS], and body temperature management). The J-SSCG 2020 covered a total of 22 areas with four additional new areas (patient- and family-centered care, sepsis treatment system, neuro-intensive treatment, and stress ulcers). A total of 118 important clinical issues (clinical questions, CQs) were extracted regardless of the presence or absence of evidence. These CQs also include those that have been given particular focus within Japan. This is a large-scale guideline covering multiple fields; thus, in addition to the 25 committee members, we had the participation and support of a total of 226 members who are professionals (physicians, nurses, physiotherapists, clinical engineers, and pharmacists) and medical workers with a history of sepsis or critical illness. The GRADE method was adopted for making recommendations, and the modified Delphi method was used to determine recommendations by voting from all committee members.As a result, 79 GRADE-based recommendations, 5 Good Practice Statements (GPS), 18 expert consensuses, 27 answers to background questions (BQs), and summaries of definitions and diagnosis of sepsis were created as responses to 118 CQs. We also incorporated visual information for each CQ according to the time course of treatment, and we will also distribute this as an app. The J-SSCG 2020 is expected to be widely used as a useful bedside guideline in the field of sepsis treatment both in Japan and overseas involving multiple disciplines.

Comparative Effectiveness of Protective Ventilation Strategies for Moderate and Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome. A Network Meta-Analysis

Rationale: Choosing the best ventilation strategy for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is complex, yet it is highly relevant to clinicians during a respiratory pandemic. Objectives: To compare the effects of low Vt, high Vt, high positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), prone ventilation, high-frequency oscillation, and venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) on mortality in ARDS. Methods: We performed a network meta-analysis of randomized trials. We applied the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology to discern the relative effect of interventions on mortality. Measurements and Main Results: We analyzed 34 trials including 9,085 adults with primarily moderate-to-severe ARDS (median baseline Pa_O2/Fi_O2, 118; interquartile range, 110-143). Prone positioning combined with low Vt was the best strategy (risk ratio [RR], 0.74 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.60-0.92] vs. low Vt; high certainty). VV ECMO was also rated among the best (RR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.58-1.05] vs. low Vt; RR, 0.66; [95% CI, 0.49-0.88] vs. high Vt) but was rated with lower certainty because VV ECMO was restricted to very severe ARDS (mean baseline Pa_O2/Fi_O2<75). High PEEP combined with low Vt was rated intermediately (RR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.81-1.03] vs. low Vt; low certainty; RR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.65-0.91] vs. high Vt; moderate certainty). High Vt was rated worst (RR, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.02-1.37] vs. low Vt; moderate certainty), and we found no support for high-frequency oscillation or high Vt with prone ventilation. Conclusions: These findings suggest that combining low Vt with prone ventilation is associated with the greatest reduction in mortality for critically ill adults with moderate-to-severe ARDS.

Ventilatory Variables and Mechanical Power in Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Rationale: Mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has decreased after the adoption of lung-protective strategies. Lower Vt, lower driving pressure (ΔP), lower respiratory rates (RR), and higher end-expiratory pressure have all been suggested as key components of lung protection strategies. A unifying theoretical explanation has been proposed that attributes lung injury to the energy transfer rate (mechanical power) from the ventilator to the patient, calculated from a combination of several ventilator variables.Objectives: To assess the impact of mechanical power on mortality in patients with ARDS as compared with that of primary ventilator variables such as the ΔP, Vt, and RR.Methods: We obtained data on ventilatory variables and mechanical power from a pooled database of patients with ARDS who had participated in six randomized clinical trials of protective mechanical ventilation and one large observational cohort of patients with ARDS. The primary outcome was mortality at 28 days or 60 days.Measurements and Main Results: We included 4,549 patients (38% women; mean age, 55 ± 23 yr). The average mechanical power was 0.32 ± 0.14 J · min^-1 · kg^-1 of predicted body weight, the ΔP was 15.0 ± 5.8 cm H₂O, and the RR was 25.7 ± 7.4 breaths/min. The driving pressure, RR, and mechanical power were significant predictors of mortality in adjusted analyses. The impact of the ΔP on mortality was four times as large as that of the RR.Conclusions: Mechanical power was associated with mortality during controlled mechanical ventilation in ARDS, but a simpler model using only the ΔP and RR was equivalent.

Bronchopleural Fistula in the Mechanically Ventilated Patient: A Concise Review

OBJECTIVE

To describe the physiology of air leak in bronchopleural fistula in mechanically ventilated patients and how understanding of its physiology drives management of positive-pressure ventilation. To provide guidance of lung isolation, mechanical ventilator, pleural catheter, and endobronchial strategies for the management of bronchopleural fistula on mechanical ventilation.

DATA SOURCES

Online search of PubMed and manual review of articles (laboratory and patient studies) was performed.

STUDY SELECTION

Articles relevant to bronchopleural fistula, mechanical ventilation in patients with bronchopleural fistula, independent lung ventilation, high-flow ventilatory modes, physiology of persistent air leak, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, fluid dynamics of bronchopleural fistula airflow, and intrapleural catheter management were selected. Randomized trials, observational studies, case reports, and physiologic studies were included.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data from selected studies were qualitatively evaluated for this review. We included data illustrating the physiology of driving pressure across a bronchopleural fistula as well as data, largely from case reports, demonstrating management and outcomes with various ventilator modes, intrapleural catheter techniques, endoscopic placement of occlusion and valve devices, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Themes related to managing persistent air leak with mechanical ventilation were reviewed and extracted.

DATA SYNTHESIS

In case reports that demonstrate different approaches to managing patients with bronchopleural fistula requiring mechanical ventilation, common themes emerge. Strategies aimed at decreasing peak inspiratory pressure, using lower tidal volumes, lowering positive end-expiratory pressure, decreasing the inspiratory time, and decreasing the respiratory rate, while minimizing negative intrapleural pressure decreases airflow across the bronchopleural fistula.

CONCLUSIONS

Mechanical ventilation and intrapleural catheter management must be individualized and aimed at reducing air leak. Clinicians should emphasize reducing peak inspiratory pressures, reducing positive end-expiratory pressure, and limiting negative intrapleural pressure. In refractory cases, clinicians can consider lung isolation, independent lung ventilation, or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in appropriate patients as well as definitive management with advanced bronchoscopic placement of valves or occlusion devices.

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.

Impact of differences in acute respiratory distress syndrome randomised controlled trial inclusion and exclusion criteria: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Control-arm mortality varies between acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) RCTs.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed ARDS RCTs that commenced recruitment after publication of the American-European Consensus (AECC) definition (MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane central register of controlled trials; January 1994 to October 2020). We assessed concordance of RCT inclusion criteria to ARDS consensus definitions and whether exclusion criteria are strongly or poorly justified. We estimated the proportion of between-trial difference in control-arm 28-day mortality explained by the inclusion criteria and RCT design characteristics using meta-regression.

RESULTS

A literature search identified 43 709 records. One hundred and fifty ARDS RCTs were included; 146/150 (97.3%) RCTs defined ARDS inclusion criteria using AECC/Berlin definitions. Deviations from consensus definitions, primarily aimed at improving ARDS diagnostic certainty, frequently related to duration of hypoxaemia (117/146; 80.1%). Exclusion criteria could be grouped by rationale for selection into strongly or poorly justified criteria. Common poorly justified exclusions included pregnancy related, age, and comorbidities (infectious/immunosuppression, hepatic, renal, and human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome). Control-arm 28-day mortality varied between ARDS RCTs (mean: 29.8% [95% confidence interval: 27.0-32.7%; I2=88.8%; τ2=0.02; P<0.01]), and differed significantly between RCTs with different Pao2:FiO2 ratio inclusion thresholds (26.6-39.9 kPa vs <26.6 kPa; P<0.01). In a meta-regression model, inclusion criteria and RCT design characteristics accounted for 30.6% of between-trial difference (P<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In most ARDS RCTs, consensus definitions are modified to use as inclusion criteria. Between-RCT mortality differences are mostly explained by the Pao2:FiO2 ratio threshold within the consensus definitions. An exclusion criteria framework can be applied when designing and reporting exclusion criteria in future ARDS RCTs.

OLA strategy for ARDS: Its effect on mortality depends on achieved recruitment (PaO2/FiO2) and mechanical power. Systematic review and meta-analysis with meta-regression

OBJECTIVE

The "Open Lung Approach" (OLA), that includes high levels of positive end-expiratory pressure coupled with limited tidal volumes, is considered optimal for adult patients with ARDS. However, many previous meta-analyses have shown only marginal benefits of OLA on mortality but with statistical heterogeneity. It is crucial to identify the most likely moderators of this effect. To determine the effect of OLA strategy on mortality of ventilated ARDS patients. We hypothesized that the degree of recruitment achieved in the control group (PaO2/FiO2 ratio on day 3 of ventilation), and the difference in Mechanical Power (MP) or Driving Pressure (DP) between experimental and control groups will be the most likely sources of heterogeneity.

DESIGN

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis was performed according to PRISMA statement and registered in PROSPERO database. We searched only for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). GRADE guidelines were used for rating the quality of evidence. Publication bias was assessed. For the Meta-analysis, we used a Random Effects Model. Sources of heterogeneity were explored with Meta-Regression, using a priori proposed set of possible moderators. For model comparison, Akaike's Information Criterion with the finite sample correction (AICc) was used.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PATIENTS

Fourteen RCTs were included in the study.

INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

MAIN VARIABLES OF INTEREST

Not applicable.

RESULTS

Evidence of publication bias was detected, and quality of evidence was downgraded. Pooled analysis did not show a significant difference in the 28-day mortality between OLA strategy and control groups. Overall risk of bias was low. The analysis detected statistical heterogeneity. The two "best" explicative meta-regression models were those that used control PaO2/FiO2 on day 3 and difference in MP between experimental and control groups. The DP and MP models were highly correlated.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no clear benefit of OLA strategy on mortality of ARDS patients, with significant heterogeneity among RCTs. Mortality effect of OLA is mediated by lung recruitment and mechanical power.

High versus low positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) levels for mechanically ventilated adult patients with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome

BACKGROUND

In patients with acute lung injury (ALI) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), mortality remains high. These patients require mechanical ventilation, which has been associated with ventilator-induced lung injury. High levels of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) could reduce this condition and improve patient survival. This is an updated version of the review first published in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of high versus low levels of PEEP in adults with ALI and ARDS.

SEARCH METHODS

For our previous review, we searched databases from inception until 2013. For this updated review, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, and the Web of Science from inception until May 2020. We also searched for ongoing trials (www.trialscentral.org; www.clinicaltrial.gov; www.controlled-trials.com), and we screened the reference lists of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that compared high versus low levels of PEEP in ALI and ARDS participants who were intubated and mechanically ventilated in intensive care for at least 24 hours.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed risk of bias and extracted data independently. We contacted investigators to identify additional published and unpublished studies. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four new studies (1343 participants) in this review update. In total, we included 10 studies (3851 participants). We found evidence of risk of bias in six studies, and the remaining studies fulfilled all criteria for low risk of bias. In eight studies (3703 participants), a comparison was made between high and low levels of PEEP, with the same tidal volume in both groups. In the remaining two studies (148 participants), the tidal volume was different between high- and low-level groups. In the main analysis, we assessed mortality occurring before hospital discharge only in studies that compared high versus low PEEP, with the same tidal volume in both groups. Evidence suggests that high PEEP may result in little to no difference in mortality compared to low PEEP (risk ratio (RR) 0.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 1.04; I² = 15%; 7 studies, 3640 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). In addition, high PEEP may result in little to no difference in barotrauma (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.57; I² = 63%; 9 studies, 3791 participants; low-certainty evidence). High PEEP may improve oxygenation in patients up to the first and third days of mechanical ventilation (first day: mean difference (MD) 51.03, 95% CI 35.86 to 66.20; I² = 85%; 6 studies, 2594 participants; low-certainty evidence; third day: MD 50.32, 95% CI 34.92 to 65.72; I² = 83%; 6 studies, 2309 participants; low-certainty evidence) and probably improves oxygenation up to the seventh day (MD 28.52, 95% CI 20.82 to 36.21; I² = 0%; 5 studies, 1611 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Evidence suggests that high PEEP results in little to no difference in the number of ventilator-free days (MD 0.45, 95% CI -2.02 to 2.92; I² = 81%; 3 studies, 1654 participants; low-certainty evidence). Available data were insufficient to pool the evidence for length of stay in the intensive care unit.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-certainty evidence shows that high levels compared to low levels of PEEP do not reduce mortality before hospital discharge. Low-certainty evidence suggests that high levels of PEEP result in little to no difference in the risk of barotrauma. Low-certainty evidence also suggests that high levels of PEEP improve oxygenation up to the first and third days of mechanical ventilation, and moderate-certainty evidence indicates that high levels of PEEP improve oxygenation up to the seventh day of mechanical ventilation. As in our previous review, we found clinical heterogeneity - mainly within participant characteristics and methods of titrating PEEP - that does not allow us to draw definitive conclusions regarding the use of high levels of PEEP in patients with ALI and ARDS. Further studies should aim to determine the appropriate method of using high levels of PEEP and the advantages and disadvantages associated with high levels of PEEP in different ARDS and ALI patient populations.

Using Bayesian Methods to Augment the Interpretation of Critical Care Trials. An Overview of Theory and Example Reanalysis of the Alveolar Recruitment for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Trial

Most randomized trials are designed and analyzed using frequentist statistical approaches such as null hypothesis testing and P values. Conceptually, P values are cumbersome to understand, as they provide evidence of data incompatibility with a null hypothesis (e.g., no clinical benefit) and not direct evidence of the alternative hypothesis (e.g., clinical benefit). This counterintuitive framework may contribute to the misinterpretation that the absence of evidence is equal to evidence of absence and may cause the discounting of potentially informative data. Bayesian methods provide an alternative, probabilistic interpretation of data. The reanalysis of completed trials using Bayesian methods is becoming increasingly common, particularly for trials with effect estimates that appear clinically significant despite P values above the traditional threshold of 0.05. Statistical inference using Bayesian methods produces a distribution of effect sizes that would be compatible with observed trial data, interpreted in the context of prior assumptions about an intervention (called "priors"). These priors are chosen by investigators to reflect existing beliefs and past empirical evidence regarding the effect of an intervention. By calculating the likelihood of clinical benefit, a Bayesian reanalysis can augment the interpretation of a trial. However, if priors are not defined a priori, there is a legitimate concern that priors could be constructed in a manner that produces biased results. Therefore, some standardization of priors for Bayesian reanalysis of clinical trials may be desirable for the critical care community. In this Critical Care Perspective, we discuss both frequentist and Bayesian approaches to clinical trial analysis, introduce a framework that researchers can use to select priors for a Bayesian reanalysis, and demonstrate how to apply our proposal by conducting a novel Bayesian trial reanalysis.

Development and validation of a reinforcement learning algorithm to dynamically optimize mechanical ventilation in critical care

The aim of this work was to develop and evaluate the reinforcement learning algorithm VentAI, which is able to suggest a dynamically optimized mechanical ventilation regime for critically-ill patients. We built, validated and tested its performance on 11,943 events of volume-controlled mechanical ventilation derived from 61,532 distinct ICU admissions and tested it on an independent, secondary dataset (200,859 ICU stays; 25,086 mechanical ventilation events). A patient “data fingerprint” of 44 features was extracted as multidimensional time series in 4-hour time steps. We used a Markov decision process, including a reward system and a Q-learning approach, to find the optimized settings for positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO₂) and ideal body weight-adjusted tidal volume (Vt). The observed outcome was in-hospital or 90-day mortality. VentAI reached a significantly increased estimated performance return of 83.3 (primary dataset) and 84.1 (secondary dataset) compared to physicians’ standard clinical care (51.1). The number of recommended action changes per mechanically ventilated patient constantly exceeded those of the clinicians. VentAI chose 202.9% more frequently ventilation regimes with lower Vt (5–7.5 mL/kg), but 50.8% less for regimes with higher Vt (7.5–10 mL/kg). VentAI recommended 29.3% more frequently PEEP levels of 5–7 cm H₂O and 53.6% more frequently PEEP levels of 7–9 cmH₂O. VentAI avoided high (>55%) FiO₂ values (59.8% decrease), while preferring the range of 50–55% (140.3% increase). In conclusion, VentAI provides reproducible high performance by dynamically choosing an optimized, individualized ventilation strategy and thus might be of benefit for critically ill patients.

Non-specialist therapeutic strategies in acute respiratory distress syndrome

INTRODUCTION

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. We undertook a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the mortality benefit of non-specialist therapeutic interventions for ARDS available to general critical care units.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register for RCTs investigating therapeutic interventions in ARDS including corticosteroids, fluid management strategy, high PEEP, low tidal volume ventilation, neuromuscular blockade, prone position ventilation, or recruitment maneuvers. Data was collected on demographic information, treatment strategy, duration and dose of treatment, and primary (28 or 30-day mortality) and secondary (P<inf>a</inf>O<inf>2</inf>:FiO<inf>2</inf> ratio at 24-48 hours) outcomes.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

No improvement in 28-day mortality could be demonstrated in three RCTs investigating high PEEP (28.0% vs. 30.2% control; risk ratio [confidence interval] 0.93 [0.82-1.06]; eight assessing prone position ventilation (39.3% vs. 44.5%; RR 0.83 [0.68-1.01]; seven investigating neuromuscular blockade (37.8% vs. 42.0%; RR 0.91 [0.81-1.03]); ten investigating recruitment maneuvers (42.4% vs. 42.1%; RR 1.01 [0.91-1.12]); eight investigating steroids (34.8% vs. 41.1%; RR 0.81 [0.59-1.12]); and one investigating conservative fluid strategies (25.4% vs. 28.4%; RR 0.90 [0.73-1.10]). Three studies assessing low tidal volume ventilation (33.1% vs. 41.9%; RR 0.79 (0.68-0.91); P=0.001), and subgroup analyses within studies investigating prone position ventilation greater than 12 hours (33.1% vs. 44.4%; RR 0.75 [0.59-0.95), P=0.02) did reveal outcome benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

Among non-specialist therapeutic strategies available to general critical care units, low tidal volumes and prone position ventilation for greater than 12 hours improve mortality in ARDS.

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) is defined as the rapid onset of non-cardiogenic pulmonary edema resulting in respiratory failure and hypoxemia. Efforts over the past 25 years, such as those of the ARDS and Prevention and Early Treatment of Acute Lung Injury (PETAL) Networks, have demonstrated a praiseworthy collaboration to further optimize the management of ARDS. However, improvements have been only moderate and ARDS remains a leading cause of mortality in the perioperative and critical care setting. Recently, the significant morbidity and mortality of ARDS have been emphasized by its high incidence in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. A major hurdle to reducing ARDS mortality is that current treatment is limited to preventive measures – such as the use of lung-protective ventilation. Therapeutic approaches targeting the underlying inflammatory lung disease are areas of intensive research, but have not been clinically implemented. Nevertheless, basic science and clinical research efforts that are aimed at identifying novel treatment approaches and further improving outcomes for ARDS are ongoing. Here, we review evidence-based management approaches for ARDS, while highlighting those being investigated or heavily utilized in ARDS associated with COVID-19.

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome remains a condition that carries a high mortality. Evidence-based clinical management and emerging concepts for new therapies for COVID-19 are reviewed.

Treatment with 7% and 10% CO2 enhanced expression of IL-1β, TNF-α, and IL-6 in hypoxic cultures of human whole blood

Objective

This study investigated whether hypercapnia influenced the inflammatory response of hypoxic blood.

Methods

Human whole blood was cultured with 0.2% oxygen (O₂) and treated with 5%, 7%, or 10% carbon dioxide (CO₂). Interleukin (IL)-1β, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, and IL-6 were evaluated in whole blood cultures. Reactive oxygen species (ROS) production and expression levels of caspase-1 and IL-1β were evaluated in THP-1 monocytic cells.

Results

IL-1β, TNF-α, and IL-6 levels were higher in the hypoxia + 7% CO₂ group than in the hypoxia + 5% CO₂ group. The hypoxia + 10% CO₂ group had the highest IL-1β, TNF-α, and IL-6 levels, compared with the hypoxia + 7% CO₂ and hypoxia + 5% CO₂ groups. Expression levels of IL-1β, TNF-α, and IL-6 were significantly negatively correlated with pH levels in the cell culture medium. Treatment with 7% and 10% CO₂ increased the production of ROS and the expression of caspase-1 and IL-1β in hypoxia-activated THP-1 cells.

Conclusions

High levels of CO₂ treatment increased expression levels of IL-1β, TNF-α, and IL-6 in hypoxic whole blood cultures. High levels of CO₂-induced ROS overproduction and NLRP3 inflammasome activation in monocytes may comprise a target to mitigate the inflammatory response of hypoxic blood.

Optimal Upper Limits of Plateau Pressure for Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome During the First Seven Days: A Meta-Regression Analysis

Background

The effects of plateau pressure during the initial days of mechanical ventilation on outcomes for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome have not been fully examined. We conducted meta-regression analysis of plateau pressure during the first 7 days using randomized control trials to investigate the optimal upper limits of plateau pressure on different days of mechanical ventilation.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials comparing two mechanical ventilation strategies with lower and higher plateau pressures in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome were included. Meta-regression analysis was performed to determine the association of plateau pressure with mortality on days 1, 3, and 7 of mechanical ventilation.

Results

After evaluation of 2,975 citations from a comprehensive search across electronic databases, 14 studies were included in the final qualitative analysis. A total of 4,984 patients were included in the quantitative analysis. As a result of the pairwise comparison, overall short-term mortality was significantly higher for patients with plateau pressures over 32 cm H₂O during the first 3 days after intensive care unit (ICU) admission (day 1: relative risk (RR), 0.77; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.66 - 0.89; I² = 0%; day 3: RR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.64 - 0.90; I² = 0%), but not on day 7 (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.65 - 1.04; I² = 16%). Plateau pressures below 27 cm H₂O and 30 cm H₂O were not associated with an absolute risk reduction of short-term mortality. According to univariable meta-regression analysis, mortality was significantly associated with plateau pressure on day 1 (β = 0.01 (95% CI, 0.002 - 0.024), P = 0.02). On days 3 and 7, however, no significant difference was detected. When the cutoffs were set at 27, 30 and 32 cm H₂O on day 1, which showed a significant difference, plateau pressure tended to be associated with increased mortality at pressures above the cut-off values, and there were no significant differences at pressures below the cut-off values, regardless of the cutoff used.

Conclusions

This study suggests that the optimal cut-off value for plateau pressure may be 27 cm H₂O especially during the initial period of mechanical ventilation, although this association may not continue during the latter period of mechanical ventilation.

The Basics of Ventilator Waveforms

Purpose of Review

Knowledge of ventilator waveforms is important for clinicians working with children requiring mechanical ventilation. This review covers the basics of how to interpret and use data from ventilator waveforms in the pediatric intensive care unit.

Recent Findings

Patient-ventilator asynchrony (PVA) is a common finding in pediatric patients and observed in approximately one-third of ventilator breaths. PVA is associated with worse outcomes including increased length of mechanical ventilation, increased length of stay, and increased mortality. Identification of PVA is possible with a thorough knowledge of ventilator waveforms.

Summary

Ventilator waveforms are graphical descriptions of how a breath is delivered to a patient. These include three scalars (flow versus time, volume versus time, and pressure versus time) and two loops (pressure-volume and flow-volume). Thorough understanding of both scalars and loops, and their characteristic appearances, is essential to being able to evaluate a patient’s respiratory mechanics and interaction with the ventilator.

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020)

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020), a Japanese-specific set of clinical practice guidelines for sepsis and septic shock created as revised from J-SSCG 2016 jointly by the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine, was first released in September 2020 and published in February 2021. An English-language version of these guidelines was created based on the contents of the original Japanese-language version. The purpose of this guideline is to assist medical staff in making appropriate decisions to improve the prognosis of patients undergoing treatment for sepsis and septic shock. We aimed to provide high-quality guidelines that are easy to use and understand for specialists, general clinicians, and multidisciplinary medical professionals. J-SSCG 2016 took up new subjects that were not present in SSCG 2016 (e.g., ICU-acquired weakness [ICU-AW], post-intensive care syndrome [PICS], and body temperature management). The J-SSCG 2020 covered a total of 22 areas with four additional new areas (patient- and family-centered care, sepsis treatment system, neuro-intensive treatment, and stress ulcers). A total of 118 important clinical issues (clinical questions, CQs) were extracted regardless of the presence or absence of evidence. These CQs also include those that have been given particular focus within Japan. This is a large-scale guideline covering multiple fields; thus, in addition to the 25 committee members, we had the participation and support of a total of 226 members who are professionals (physicians, nurses, physiotherapists, clinical engineers, and pharmacists) and medical workers with a history of sepsis or critical illness. The GRADE method was adopted for making recommendations, and the modified Delphi method was used to determine recommendations by voting from all committee members. As a result, 79 GRADE-based recommendations, 5 Good Practice Statements (GPS), 18 expert consensuses, 27 answers to background questions (BQs), and summaries of definitions and diagnosis of sepsis were created as responses to 118 CQs. We also incorporated visual information for each CQ according to the time course of treatment, and we will also distribute this as an app. The J-SSCG 2020 is expected to be widely used as a useful bedside guideline in the field of sepsis treatment both in Japan and overseas involving multiple disciplines.

Effects of higher PEEP and recruitment manoeuvres on mortality in patients with ARDS: a systematic review, meta-analysis, meta-regression and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials

Purpose

In patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), lung recruitment could be maximised with the use of recruitment manoeuvres (RM) or applying a positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) higher than what is necessary to maintain minimal adequate oxygenation. We aimed to determine whether ventilation strategies using higher PEEP and/or RMs could decrease mortality in patients with ARDS.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL from 1996 to December 2019, included randomized controlled trials comparing ventilation with higher PEEP and/or RMs to strategies with lower PEEP and no RMs in patients with ARDS. We computed pooled estimates with a DerSimonian-Laird mixed-effects model, assessing mortality and incidence of barotrauma, population characteristics, physiologic variables and ventilator settings. We performed a trial sequential analysis (TSA) and a meta-regression.

Results

Excluding two studies that used tidal volume (V_T) reduction as co-intervention, we included 3870 patients from 10 trials using higher PEEP alone (n = 3), combined with RMs (n = 6) or RMs alone (n = 1). We did not observe differences in mortality (relative risk, RR 0.96, 95% confidence interval, CI [0.84–1.09], p = 0.50) nor in incidence of barotrauma (RR 1.22, 95% CI [0.93–1.61], p = 0.16). In the meta-regression, the PEEP difference between intervention and control group at day 1 and the use of RMs were not associated with increased risk of barotrauma. The TSA reached the required information size for mortality (n = 2928), and the z-line surpassed the futility boundary.

Conclusions

At low V_T, the routine use of higher PEEP and/or RMs did not reduce mortality in unselected patients with ARDS.

Trial registration

PROSPERO CRD42017082035.

Prognostic classification based on P/F and PEEP in invasively ventilated ICU patients with hypoxemia-insights from the MARS study

Background

Outcome prediction in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) greatly improves when patients are reclassified based on predefined arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen ratios (PaO₂/FiO₂) and positive end–expiratory pressure (PEEP) cutoffs 24 h after the initial ARDS diagnosis. The aim of this study was to test whether outcome prediction improves when patients are reclassified based on predefined PaO₂/FiO₂ and PEEP cutoffs 24 h after development of mild hypoxemia while not having ARDS.

Methods

Post hoc analysis of a large prospective, multicenter, observational study that ran in the ICUs of two academic hospitals in the Netherlands between January 2011 and December 2013. Patients were classified into four groups using predefined cutoffs for PaO₂/FiO₂ (250 mmHg) and PEEP (5 cm H₂O), both at onset of hypoxemia and after 24 h: PaO₂/FiO₂ ≥ 250 mmHg and PEEP < 6 cm H₂O (group I), PaO₂/FiO₂ ≥ 250 mmHg and PEEP ≥ 6 cm H₂O (group II), PaO₂/FiO₂ < 250 mmHg and PEEP < 6 cm H₂O (group III), and PaO₂/FiO₂ < 250 mmHg and PEEP ≥ 6 cm H₂O (group IV), to look for trend association with all-cause in-hospital mortality, the primary outcome. Secondary outcome were ICU- and 90-day mortality, and the number of ventilator-free days or ICU-free days and alive at day 28.

Results

The analysis included 689 consecutive patients. All-cause in-hospital mortality was 35%. There was minimal variation in mortality between the four groups at onset of hypoxemia (33, 36, 38, and 34% in groups I to IV, respectively; P = 0.65). Reclassification after 24 h resulted in a strong trend with increasing mortality from group I to group IV (31, 31, 37, and 48% in groups I to IV, respectively; P < 0.01). Similar trends were found for the secondary endpoints.

Conclusions

Reclassification using PaO₂/FiO₂ and PEEP cutoffs after 24 h improved classification for outcome in invasively ventilated ICU patients with hypoxemia not explained by ARDS, compared to classification at onset of hypoxemia.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01905033. Registered on July 11, 2013. Retrospectively registered.