Individualization of Positive End-Expiratory Pressure Setting in Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome under Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation. Inputs from Electrical Impedance Tomography

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Respiratory Failure: A Narrative Review

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support for respiratory failure in the intensive care unit continues to have an expanded role in select patients. While acute respiratory distress syndrome remains the most common indication, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation may be used in other causes of refractory hypoxemia and/or hypercapnia. The most common configuration is veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation; however, in specific cases of refractory hypoxemia or right ventricular failure, some patients may benefit from veno-pulmonary extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or veno-venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Patient selection and extracorporeal circuit management are essential to successful outcomes. This narrative review explores the physiology of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, indications and contraindications, ventilator management, extracorporeal circuit management, troubleshooting hypoxemia, complications, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation weaning in patients with respiratory failure. As the footprint of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation continues to expand, it is essential that clinicians understand the underlying physiology and management of these complex patients.

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.

The global inhomogeneity index assessed by electrical impedance tomography overestimates PEEP requirement in patients with ARDS: an observational study

Background

Electrical impedance tomography (EIT) visualises alveolar overdistension and alveolar collapse and enables optimisation of ventilator settings by using the best balance between alveolar overdistension and collapse (ODCL). Besides, the global inhomogeneity index (GI), measured by EIT, may also be of added value in determining PEEP. Optimal PEEP is often determined based on the best dynamic compliance without EIT at the bedside. This study aimed to assess the effect of a PEEP trial on ODCL, GI and dynamic compliance in patients with and without ARDS. Secondly, PEEP levels from “optimal PEEP” approaches by ODCL, GI and dynamic compliance are compared.

Methods

In 2015–2016, we included patients with ARDS using postoperative cardiothoracic surgery patients as a reference group. A PEEP trial was performed with four consecutive incremental followed by four decremental PEEP steps of 2 cmH₂O. Primary outcomes at each step were GI, ODCL and best dynamic compliance. In addition, the agreement between ODCL, GI, and dynamic compliance was determined for the individual patient.

Results

Twenty-eight ARDS and 17 postoperative cardiothoracic surgery patients were included. The mean optimal PEEP, according to best compliance, was 10.3 (±2.9) cmH₂O in ARDS compared to 9.8 (±2.5) cmH₂O in cardiothoracic surgery patients. Optimal PEEP according to ODCL was 10.9 (±2.5) in ARDS and 9.6 (±1.6) in cardiothoracic surgery patients. Optimal PEEP according to GI was 17.1 (±3.9) in ARDS compared to 14.2 (±3.4) in cardiothoracic surgery patients.

Conclusions

Currently, no golden standard to titrate PEEP is available. We showed that when using the GI, PEEP requirements are higher compared to ODCL and best dynamic compliance during a PEEP trial in patients with and without ARDS.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12871-022-01801-7.