Applying Precision Medicine to Trial Design Using Physiology. Extracorporeal CO2 Removal for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Linking Acute Physiology to Outcomes in the ICU: Challenges and Solutions for Research

ICU clinicians rely on bedside physiological measurements to inform many routine clinical decisions. Because deranged physiology is usually associated with poor clinical outcomes, it is tempting to hypothesize that manipulating and intervening on physiological parameters might improve outcomes for patients. However, testing these hypotheses through mathematical models of the relationship between physiology and outcomes presents a number of important methodological challenges. These models reflect the theories of the researcher and can therefore be heavily influenced by one's assumptions and background beliefs. Model building must therefore be approached with great care and forethought, because failure to consider relevant sources of measurement error, confounding, coupling, and time dependency or failure to assess the direction of causality for associations of interest before modeling may give rise to spurious results. This paper outlines the main challenges in analyzing and interpreting these models and offers potential solutions to address these challenges.

Laying the Groundwork for Physiology-Guided Precision Medicine in the Critically Ill

Canonical critical care syndromes such as sepsis and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) include patients with markedly heterogeneous biology.1 This, paired with decades of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that were traditionally viewed as "negative," has stalled progress in improving patient outcomes.2 However, emerging awareness of sub-phenotypes based on differences in biomarker profiles and resulting heterogeneous treatment effects have led to calls for precision medicine in which therapies are targeted to those most likely to benefit.3.

Determinants of Effect of Extracorporeal CO2 Removal in Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure

BACKGROUND: Dead space and respiratory system elastance (Ers) may influence the clinical benefit of a ventilation strategy combining very low tidal volume (VT) with extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO2R) in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. We sought to evaluate whether the effect of ECCO2R on mortality varies according to ventilatory ratio (VR; a composite variable reflective of dead space and shunt) and Ers. METHODS: Secondary analysis of a trial of a strategy combining very low VT and low-flow ECCO2R planned before the availability of trial results. Bayesian logistic regression was used to estimate the posterior probability of effect moderation by VR, Ers, and severity of hypoxemia (ratio of arterial partial pressure of oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen [PaO2:FiO2]) on 90-day mortality. Credibility of effect moderation was appraised according to the Instrument for Assessing the Credibility of Effect Modification Analyses criteria. RESULTS: A total of 405 patients were available for analysis. The effect of the intervention on mortality varied substantially with VR (posterior probability of interaction, 94%; high credibility). Benefit was more probable than harm in patients with VR 3 or higher. In patients with VR less than 3, the probability of increased mortality with intervention was high (>90%). The effect of the intervention also varied with PaO2:FiO2 (posterior probability of interaction, >99%; low credibility). Benefit was more probable than harm in patients with PaO2:FiO2 110 mm Hg or higher. The effect of the intervention did not vary substantially with Ers (posterior probability of interaction, 68%; low credibility). CONCLUSIONS: VR has a highly credible influence on the effect of a strategy combining very low VT and low-flow ECCO2R on mortality. This intervention may reduce mortality in patients with high VR. (Funded by an Early Career Investigator Award from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research to Dr. Goligher.)

Advancing Precision Medicine for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a common and life-threatening cause of respiratory failure. Despite decades of research, there are no effective pharmacologic therapies to treat this disease process and mortality remains high. The shortcomings of prior translational research efforts have been increasingly attributed to the heterogeneity of this complex syndrome, which has led to an increased focus on elucidating the mechanisms underlying the interpersonal heterogeneity of ARDS. This shift in focus aims to move the field towards personalized medicine by defining subgroups of ARDS patients with distinct biology, termed endotypes, to quickly identify patients that are most likely to benefit from mechanism targeted treatments. In this review, we first provide a historical perspective and review the key clinical trials that have advanced ARDS treatment. We then review the key challenges that exist with regards to the identification of treatable traits and the implementation of personalized medicine approaches in ARDS. Lastly, we discuss potential strategies and recommendations for future research that we believe will aid in both understanding the molecular pathogenesis of ARDS and the development of personalized treatment approaches.

Dead space ventilation-related indices: bedside tools to evaluate the ventilation and perfusion relationship in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome

Cumulative evidence has demonstrated that the ventilatory ratio closely correlates with mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and a primary feature in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-ARDS is increased dead space that has been reported recently. Thus, new attention has been given to this group of dead space ventilation-related indices, such as physiological dead space fraction, ventilatory ratio, and end-tidal-to-arterial PCO₂ ratio, which, albeit distinctive, are all global indices with which to assess the relationship between ventilation and perfusion. These parameters have already been applied to positive end expiratory pressure titration, prediction of responses to the prone position and the field of extracorporeal life support for patients suffering from ARDS. Dead space ventilation-related indices remain hampered by several deflects; notwithstanding, for this catastrophic syndrome, they may facilitate better stratifications and identifications of subphenotypes, thereby providing therapy tailored to individual needs.

The impact of reduction in intensity of mechanical ventilation upon venovenous ECMO initiation on radiographically assessed lung edema scores: A retrospective observational study

Background

Patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) typically receive ultra-protective ventilation after extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is initiated. While the benefit of ECMO appears to derive from supporting “lung rest”, reductions in the intensity of mechanical ventilation, principally tidal volume limitation, may manifest radiologically. This study evaluated the relative changes in radiographic assessment of lung edema (RALE) score upon venovenous ECMO initiation in patients with severe ARDS.

Methods

Digital chest x-rays (CXR) performed at baseline immediately before initiation of ECMO, and at intervals post (median 1.1, 2.1, and 9.6 days) were reviewed in 39 Adult ARDS patients. One hundred fifty-six digital images were scored by two independent, blinded radiologists according to the RALE (Radiographic Assessment of Lung Edema) scoring criteria. Ventilatory data, ECMO parameters and fluid balance were recorded at corresponding time points. Multivariable analysis was performed analyzing the change in RALE score over time relative to baseline.

Results

The RALE score demonstrated excellent inter-rater agreement in this novel application in an ECMO cohort. Mean RALE scores increased from 28 (22–37) at baseline to 35 (26–42) (p < 0.001) on D1 of ECMO; increasing RALE was associated with higher baseline APACHE III scores [ß value +0.19 (0.08, 0.30) p = 0.001], and greater reductions in tidal volume [ß value −2.08 (−3.07, −1.10) p < 0.001] after ECMO initiation. Duration of mechanical ventilation, and ECMO support did not differ between survivors and non-survivors.

Conclusions

The magnitude of reductions in delivered tidal volumes correlated with increasing RALE scores (radiographic worsening) in ARDS patients receiving ECMO. Implications for patient centered outcomes remain unclear. There is a need to define appropriate ventilator settings on venovenous ECMO, counterbalancing the risks vs. benefits of optimal “lung rest” against potential atelectrauma.

New Insights into Clinical and Mechanistic Heterogeneity of the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Summary of the Aspen Lung Conference 2021

Clinical and molecular heterogeneity are common features of human disease. Understanding the basis for heterogeneity has led to major advances in therapy for many cancers and pulmonary diseases such as cystic fibrosis and asthma. Although heterogeneity of risk factors, disease severity, and outcomes in survivors are common features of the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), many challenges exist in understanding the clinical and molecular basis for disease heterogeneity and using heterogeneity to tailor therapy for individual patients. This report summarizes the proceedings of the 2021 Aspen Lung Conference, which was organized to review key issues related to understanding clinical and molecular heterogeneity in ARDS. The goals were to review new information about ARDS phenotypes, to explore multicellular and multisystem mechanisms responsible for heterogeneity, and to review how best to account for clinical and molecular heterogeneity in clinical trial design and assessment of outcomes. The report concludes with recommendations for future research to understand the clinical and basic mechanisms underlying heterogeneity in ARDS to advance the development of new treatments for this life-threatening critical illness.

Venovenous extracorporeal CO2 removal to support ultraprotective ventilation in moderate-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature

BACKGROUND

A strategy that limits tidal volumes and inspiratory pressures, improves outcomes in patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO₂R) may facilitate ultra-protective ventilation. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of venovenous ECCO₂R in supporting ultra-protective ventilation in moderate-to-severe ARDS.

METHODS

MEDLINE and EMBASE were interrogated for studies (2000-2021) reporting venovenous ECCO₂R use in patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS. Studies reporting ≥10 adult patients in English language journals were included. Ventilatory parameters after 24 h of initiating ECCO₂R, device characteristics, and safety outcomes were collected. The primary outcome measure was the change in driving pressure at 24 h of ECCO₂R therapy in relation to baseline. Secondary outcomes included change in tidal volume, gas exchange, and safety data.

RESULTS

Ten studies reporting 421 patients (PaO₂:FiO₂ 141.03 mmHg) were included. Extracorporeal blood flow rates ranged from 0.35-1.5 L/min. Random effects modelling indicated a 3.56 cmH₂O reduction (95%-CI: 3.22-3.91) in driving pressure from baseline (p < .001) and a 1.89 mL/kg (95%-CI: 1.75-2.02, p < .001) reduction in tidal volume. Oxygenation, respiratory rate and PEEP remained unchanged. No significant interactions between driving pressure reduction and baseline driving pressure, partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide or PaO₂:FiO₂ ratio were identified in metaregression analysis. Bleeding and haemolysis were the commonest complications of therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Venovenous ECCO₂R permitted significant reductions in ∆P in patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS. Heterogeneity amongst studies and devices, a paucity of randomised controlled trials, and variable safety reporting calls for standardisation of outcome reporting. Prospective evaluation of optimal device operation and anticoagulation in high quality studies is required before further recommendations can be made.

Mechanical Ventilation during ECMO: Lessons from Clinical Trials and Future Prospects

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) accounts for 10% of ICU admissions and affects 3 million patients each year. Despite decades of research, it is still associated with one of the highest mortality rates in the critically ill. Advances in supportive care, innovations in technologies and insights from recent clinical trials have contributed to improved outcomes and a renewed interest in the scope and use of Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) as a treatment for severe ARDS, including high flow veno-venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (VV-ECMO) and low flow Extracorporeal Carbon Dioxide Removal (ECCO2R). The rationale being that extracorporeal gas exchange allows the use of lung protective ventilator settings, thereby minimizing ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI). Ventilation strategies are adapted to the patient's condition during the different stages of ECMO support. Several areas in the management of mechanical ventilation in patients on ECMO, such as the best ventilator mode, extubation-decannulation sequence and tracheostomy timing, are tailored to the patients' recovery. Reduction in sedation allowing mobilization, nutrition and early rehabilitation are subsequent therapeutic goals after lung rest has been achieved.

Intraoperative use of extracorporeal CO2 removal (ECCO2R) and emergency ECMO requirement in patients undergoing lung transplant: a case-matched cohort retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The use of extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO₂R) is less invasive than extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), and intraoperative control of gas exchange could be feasible. The aim of this study in intermediate intraoperative severity patients undergoing LT was to assess the role of intraoperative ECCO₂R on emergency ECMO requirement in patients.

METHODS

Thirty-eight consecutive patients undergoing lung transplantation (LT) with "intermediate" intraoperative severity in the intervals 2007 to 2010 or 2011 to 2014 were analyzed as historical comparison of case-matched cohort retrospective study. The "intermediate" intraoperative severity was defined as the development of intraoperative severe respiratory acidosis with maintained oxygenation function (i.e., pH <7.25, PaCO₂ >60 mmHg, and PaO₂/FiO₂ >150), not associated with hemodynamic instability. Of these 38 patients, twenty-three patients were treated in the 2007-2010 interval by receiving "standard intraoperative treatment," while 15 patients were treated in the 2011-2014 interval by receiving "standard intraoperative treatment + ECCO₂R."

RESULTS

ECMO requirement was more frequent among patients that received "standard intraoperative treatment" alone than in those treated with "standard intraoperative treatment + ECCO₂R" (17/23 vs. 3/15; p = 0.004). The use of ECCO₂R improved pH and PaCO₂ while mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) decreased.

CONCLUSION

In intermediate intraoperative severity patients, the use of ECCO₂R reduces the ECMO requirement.

Risks and Benefits of Ultra-Lung-Protective Invasive Mechanical Ventilation Strategies with a Focus on Extracorporeal Support

Lung-protective ventilation strategies are the current standard of care for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in an effort to provide adequate ventilatory requirements while minimizing ventilator-induced lung injury. Some patients may benefit from ultra-lung-protective ventilation, a strategy that achieves lower airway pressures and tidal volumes than the current standard. Specific physiological parameters beyond severity of hypoxemia, such as driving pressure and respiratory system elastance, may be predictive of those most likely to benefit. Since application of ultra-lung-protective ventilation is often limited by respiratory acidosis, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) or extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO2R), which remove carbon dioxide from blood, are attractive options. These strategies are associated with hematological complications, especially when applied at low blood flow rates with devices designed for higher blood flows, and a recent large randomized, controlled trial failed to show a benefit from an ECCO2R-facilitated ultra-lung-protective ventilation strategy. Only in patients with very severe forms of ARDS has the use of an ultra-lung-protective ventilation strategy - accomplished with ECMO - been suggested to have a favorable risk-to-benefit profile. In this Critical Care Perspective, we address key areas of controversy related to ultra-lung-protective ventilation, including the trade-offs between minimizing ventilator-induced lung injury and the risks from strategies to achieve this added protection. In addition, we suggest which patients might benefit most from an ultra-lung-protective strategy and propose areas of future research.

Targeting arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide in acute respiratory distress syndrome patients using extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal

BACKGROUND

A retrospective analysis of SUPERNOVA trial data showed that reductions in tidal volume to ultraprotective levels without significant increases in arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO₂ ) for critically ill, mechanically ventilated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) depends on the rate of extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO₂ R).

METHODS

We used a whole-body mathematical model of acid-base balance to quantify the effect of altering carbon dioxide (CO₂ ) removal rates using different ECCO₂ R devices to achieve target PaCO₂ levels in ARDS patients. Specifically, we predicted the effect of using a new, larger surface area PrismaLung+ device instead of the original PrismaLung device on the results from two multicenter clinical studies in critically ill, mechanically ventilated ARDS patients.

RESULTS

After calibrating model parameters to the clinical study data using the PrismaLung device, model predictions determined optimal extracorporeal blood flow rates for the PrismaLung+ and mechanical ventilation frequencies to obtain target PaCO₂ levels of 45 and 50 mm Hg in mild and moderate ARDS patients treated at a tidal volume of 3.98 ml/kg predicted body weight (PW). Comparable model predictions showed that reductions in tidal volumes below 6 ml/kg PBW may be difficult for acidotic highly severe ARDS patients with acute kidney injury and high CO₂ production rates using a PrismaLung+ device in-series with a continuous venovenous hemofiltration device.

CONCLUSIONS

The described model provides guidance on achieving target PaCO₂ levels in mechanically ventilated ARDS patients using protective and ultraprotective tidal volumes when increasing CO₂ removal rates from ECCO₂ R devices.

Effect of Lower Tidal Volume Ventilation Facilitated by Extracorporeal Carbon Dioxide Removal vs Standard Care Ventilation on 90-Day Mortality in Patients With Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: The REST Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

In patients who require mechanical ventilation for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, further reduction in tidal volumes, compared with conventional low tidal volume ventilation, may improve outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether lower tidal volume mechanical ventilation using extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal improves outcomes in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This multicenter, randomized, allocation-concealed, open-label, pragmatic clinical trial enrolled 412 adult patients receiving mechanical ventilation for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, of a planned sample size of 1120, between May 2016 and December 2019 from 51 intensive care units in the UK. Follow-up ended on March 11, 2020.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomized to receive lower tidal volume ventilation facilitated by extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal for at least 48 hours (n = 202) or standard care with conventional low tidal volume ventilation (n = 210).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was all-cause mortality 90 days after randomization. Prespecified secondary outcomes included ventilator-free days at day 28 and adverse event rates.

RESULTS

Among 412 patients who were randomized (mean age, 59 years; 143 [35%] women), 405 (98%) completed the trial. The trial was stopped early because of futility and feasibility following recommendations from the data monitoring and ethics committee. The 90-day mortality rate was 41.5% in the lower tidal volume ventilation with extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal group vs 39.5% in the standard care group (risk ratio, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.83-1.33]; difference, 2.0% [95% CI, -7.6% to 11.5%]; P = .68). There were significantly fewer mean ventilator-free days in the extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal group compared with the standard care group (7.1 [95% CI, 5.9-8.3] vs 9.2 [95% CI, 7.9-10.4] days; mean difference, -2.1 [95% CI, -3.8 to -0.3]; P = .02). Serious adverse events were reported for 62 patients (31%) in the extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal group and 18 (9%) in the standard care group, including intracranial hemorrhage in 9 patients (4.5%) vs 0 (0%) and bleeding at other sites in 6 (3.0%) vs 1 (0.5%) in the extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal group vs the control group. Overall, 21 patients experienced 22 serious adverse events related to the study device.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, the use of extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal to facilitate lower tidal volume mechanical ventilation, compared with conventional low tidal volume mechanical ventilation, did not significantly reduce 90-day mortality. However, due to early termination, the study may have been underpowered to detect a clinically important difference.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02654327.

Biotrauma during ultra-low tidal volume ventilation and venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in cardiogenic shock: a randomized crossover clinical trial

Background

Cardiogenic pulmonary oedema (CPE) may contribute to ventilator-associated lung injury (VALI) in patients with cardiogenic shock. The appropriate ventilatory strategy remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate the impact of ultra-low tidal volume ventilation with tidal volume of 3 ml/kg predicted body weight (PBW) in patients with CPE and veno–arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V–A ECMO) on lung inflammation compared to conventional ventilation.

Methods

A single-centre randomized crossover trial was performed in the Cardiac Intensive Care Unit (ICU) at a tertiary university hospital. Seventeen adults requiring V–A ECMO and mechanical ventilation due to cardiogenic shock were included from February 2017 to December 2018. Patients were ventilated for two consecutive periods of 24 h with tidal volumes of 6 and 3 ml/kg of PBW, respectively, applied in random order. Primary outcome was the change in proinflammatory mediators in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) between both ventilatory strategies.

Results

Ventilation with 3 ml/kg PBW yielded lower driving pressures and end-expiratory lung volumes. Overall, there were no differences in BALF cytokines. Post hoc analyses revealed that patients with high baseline levels of IL-6 showed statistically significant lower levels of IL-6 and IL-8 during ultra-low tidal volume ventilation. This reduction was significantly proportional to the decrease in driving pressure. In contrast, those with lower IL-6 baseline levels showed a significant increase in these biomarkers.

Conclusions

Ultra-low tidal volume ventilation in patients with CPE and V–A ECMO may attenuate inflammation in selected cases. VALI may be driven by an interaction between the individual proinflammatory profile and the mechanical load overimposed by the ventilator.

Trial registration The trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT03041428, Registration date: 2nd February 2017).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13613-021-00919-0.

Effect of Lowering Vt on Mortality in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Varies with Respiratory System Elastance

Rationale: If the risk of ventilator-induced lung injury in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is causally determined by driving pressure rather than by Vt, then the effect of ventilation with lower Vt on mortality would be predicted to vary according to respiratory system elastance (Ers). Objectives: To determine whether the mortality benefit of ventilation with lower Vt varies according to Ers. Methods: In a secondary analysis of patients from five randomized trials of lower- versus higher-Vt ventilation strategies in ARDS and acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, the posterior probability of an interaction between the randomized Vt strategy and Ers on 60-day mortality was computed using Bayesian multivariable logistic regression. Measurements and Main Results: Of 1,096 patients available for analysis, 416 (38%) died by Day 60. The posterior probability that the mortality benefit from lower-Vt ventilation strategies varied with Ers was 93% (posterior median interaction odds ratio, 0.80 per cm H₂O/[ml/kg]; 90% credible interval, 0.63-1.02). Ers was classified as low (<2 cm H₂O/[ml/kg], n = 321, 32%), intermediate (2-3 cm H₂O/[ml/kg], n = 475, 46%), and high (>3 cm H₂O/[ml/kg], n = 224, 22%). In these groups, the posterior probabilities of an absolute risk reduction in mortality ≥ 1% were 55%, 82%, and 92%, respectively. The posterior probabilities of an absolute risk reduction ≥ 5% were 29%, 58%, and 82%, respectively. Conclusions: The mortality benefit of ventilation with lower Vt in ARDS varies according to elastance, suggesting that lung-protective ventilation strategies should primarily target driving pressure rather than Vt.

A preliminary cost-effectiveness analysis of lung protective ventilation with extra corporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO2R) in the management of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS)

Background

Mechanical ventilation (MV) is the cornerstone in the management of the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Recent research suggests that decreasing the intensity of MV using lung protective ventilation (LPV) with lower tidal volume (Vt) and driving pressure (∆P) could improve survival. Extra-corporal CO₂ removal (ECCO₂R) precisely enables LPV by allowing lower Vt, ∆P and mechanical power while maintaining PaCO₂ within a physiologic range. This study evaluates the potential cost-effectiveness of ECCO₂R-enabled LPV in France.

Methods

We modelled the distribution over time of ventilated ARDS patients across 3 health-states (alive & ventilated, alive & weaned from ventilation, dead). We compared the outcomes of 3 strategies: MV (no ECCO₂R), LPV (ECCO₂R when PaCO₂ > 55 mmHg) and Ultra-LPV (ECCO₂R for all). Patients characteristics, ventilation settings, survival and lengths of stay were derived from a large ARDS epidemiology study. Survival benefits associated with lower ∆P were taken from the analysis of more than 3000 patients enrolled in 9 randomized trials. Health outcomes were expressed in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were computed with both Day 60 cost and Lifetime cost.

Results

Both LPV and ULPV as enabled by ECCO2R provided favorable results at Day 60 as compared to MV. Survival rates were increased with the protective strategies, notably with ULPV that provided even more manifest benefits as compared to MV. LPV and ULPV produced +0.162 and + 0.627 incremental QALYs as compared to MV, respectively. LPV and ULPV costs were augmented because of their survival benefits. Nonetheless, ICERs of LPV and ULPV vs. MV were all well below the €50,000 threshold. ULPV also presented with favorable ICERs as compared to LPV (i.e. less than €25,000/QALY).

Conclusions

ECCO₂R-enabled LPV strategies might provide cost-effective survival benefit. Additional data from interventional and observational studies are needed to support this preliminary model-based analysis.

Phenotypes and personalized medicine in the acute respiratory distress syndrome

Although the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is well defined by the development of acute hypoxemia, bilateral infiltrates and non-cardiogenic pulmonary edema, ARDS is heterogeneous in terms of clinical risk factors, physiology of lung injury, microbiology, and biology, potentially explaining why pharmacologic therapies have been mostly unsuccessful in treating ARDS. Identifying phenotypes of ARDS and integrating this information into patient selection for clinical trials may increase the chance for efficacy with new treatments. In this review, we focus on classifying ARDS by the associated clinical disorders, physiological data, and radiographic imaging. We consider biologic phenotypes, including plasma protein biomarkers, gene expression, and common causative microbiologic pathogens. We will also discuss the issue of focusing clinical trials on the patient's phase of lung injury, including prevention, administration of therapy during early acute lung injury, and treatment of established ARDS. A more in depth understanding of the interplay of these variables in ARDS should provide more success in designing and conducting clinical trials and achieving the goal of personalized medicine.

Extracorporeal life support for adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome

Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) can support gas exchange in patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). During ECLS, venous blood is drained from a central vein via a cannula, pumped through a semipermeable membrane that permits diffusion of oxygen and carbon dioxide, and returned via a cannula to a central vein. Two related forms of ECLS are used. Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), which uses high blood flow rates to both oxygenate the blood and remove carbon dioxide, may be considered in patients with severe ARDS whose oxygenation or ventilation cannot be maintained adequately with best practice conventional mechanical ventilation and adjunctive therapies, including prone positioning. Extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO₂R) uses lower blood flow rates through smaller cannulae and provides substantial CO₂ elimination (~ 20–70% of total CO₂ production), albeit with marginal improvement in oxygenation. The rationale for using ECCO₂R in ARDS is to facilitate lung-protective ventilation by allowing a reduction of tidal volume, respiratory rate, plateau pressure, driving pressure and mechanical power delivered by the mechanical ventilator. This narrative review summarizes physiological concepts related to ECLS, as well as the rationale and evidence supporting ECMO and ECCO₂R for the treatment of ARDS. It also reviews complications, limitations, and the ethical dilemmas that can arise in treating patients with ECLS. Finally, it discusses future key research questions and challenges for this technology.

Designing an ARDS trial for 2020 and beyond: focus on enrichment strategies

With the exception of a few successes in trials of supportive care, the majority of interventional clinical trials for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) have not led to new therapies. To improve the likelihood of benefit from clinical trial interventions in ARDS, clinical trial design must be improved. To optimize trial design, many factors need to be considered including the type of therapy to be tested, the type of trial (phase 2 or 3), how patients will be selected, primary and secondary end-points, and strategy for conduct of the trial, including potential newer trial designs such as platform or adaptive trials. Of these, optimization of patient selection is central to the likelihood of success and is particularly relevant in ARDS, which is a heterogeneous clinical syndrome, not a homogeneous disease. Recent advances including improved understanding of pathophysiologic mechanisms and better tools for outcome prediction in ARDS should facilitate both predictive and prognostic enrichment. This commentary focuses on new information and novel methods for prognostic and predictive enrichment that may be useful to optimize patient selection and increase the likelihood of positive clinical trials in ARDS.

Increased physiological dead space in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients recovering from severe acute respiratory distress syndrome: a case report

BACKGROUND

An ongoing outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is spreading globally. Recently, several articles have mentioned that the early acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) caused by COVID-19 significantly differ from those of ARDS due to other causes. Actually, we newly observed that some mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients recovering from severe ARDS (more than 14 days after invasive ventilation) often experienced evidently gradual increases in CO₂ retention and minute ventilation. However, the underlying mechanics remain unclear.

CASE PRESENTATION

To explain these pathophysiological features and discuss the ventilatory strategy during the late phase of severe ARDS in COVID-19 patients, we first used a metabolic module on a General Electric R860 ventilator (Engstrom Carestation; GE Healthcare, USA) to monitor parameters related to gas metabolism, lung mechanics and physiological dead space in two COVID-19 patients. We found that remarkably decreased ventilatory efficiency (e.g., the ratio of dead space to tidal volume 70-80%, arterial to end-tidal CO₂ difference 18-23 mmHg and ventilatory ratio 3-4) and hypermetabolism (oxygen consumption 300-400 ml/min, CO₂ elimination 200-300 ml/min) may explain why these patients experienced more severe respiratory distress and CO₂ retention in the late phase of ARDS caused by COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

During the recovery period of ARDS among mechanically-ventilated COVID-19 patients, attention should be paid to the monitoring of physiological dead space and metabolism. Tidal volume (8-9 ml/kg) could be increased appropriately under the limited plateau pressure; however, barotrauma should still be kept in mind.

Temporary circulatory support for cardiogenic shock

Cardiogenic shock can occur due to acute ischaemic or non-ischaemic cardiac events, or from progression of long-standing underlying heart disease. When addressing the cause of underlying disease, the management of cardiogenic shock consists of vasopressors and inotropes; however, these agents can increase myocardial oxygen consumption, impair tissue perfusion, and are frequently ineffective. An alternative approach is to temporarily augment cardiac output using mechanical devices. The use of these devices-known as temporary circulatory support systems-has increased substantially in recent years, despite being expensive, resource intensive, associated with major complications, and lacking high-quality evidence to support their use. This Review summarises the physiological basis underlying the use of temporary circulatory support for cardiogenic shock, reviews the evidence informing indications and contraindications, addresses ethical considerations, and highlights the need for further research.

Determinants of the effect of extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal in the SUPERNOVA trial: implications for trial design

PURPOSE

To describe the variability and determinants of the effect of extracorporeal CO₂ removal (ECCO₂R) on tidal volume (V_t), driving pressure (ΔP), and mechanical power (Power_RS) and to determine whether highly responsive patients can be identified for the purpose of predictive enrichment in ECCO₂R trial design.

METHODS

Using data from the SUPERNOVA trial (95 patients with early moderate acute respiratory distress syndrome), the independent effects of alveolar dead space fraction (ADF), respiratory system compliance (Crs), hypoxemia (PaO₂/FiO₂), and device performance (higher vs lower CO₂ extraction) on the magnitude of reduction in V_t, ΔP, and Power_RS permitted by ECCO₂R were assessed by linear regression. Predicted and observed changes in ΔP were compared by Bland-Altman analysis. Hypothetical trials of ECCO₂R, incorporating predictive enrichment and different target CO₂ removal rates, were simulated in the SUPERNOVA study population.

RESULTS

Changes in V_t permitted by ECCO₂R were independently associated with ADF and device performance but not PaO₂/FiO₂. Changes in ΔP and Power_RS were independently associated with ADF, Crs, and device performance but not PaO₂/FiO₂. The change in ΔP predicted from ADF and Crs was moderately correlated with observed change in ΔP (R² 0.32, p < 0.001); limits of agreement between observed and predicted changes in ΔP were ± 3.9 cmH₂O. In simulated trials, restricting enrollment to patients with a larger predicted decrease in ΔP enhanced the average reduction in ΔP, increased predicted mortality benefit, and reduced sample size and screening size requirements. The increase in statistical power obtained by restricting enrollment based on predicted ΔP response varied according to device performance as specified by the target CO₂ removal rate.

CONCLUSIONS

The lung-protective benefits of ECCO₂R increase with higher alveolar dead space fraction, lower respiratory system compliance, and higher device performance. ADF and Crs, rather than severity of hypoxemia, should be the primary factors determining whether to enroll patients in clinical trials of ECCO₂R.

A 2-year multicenter, observational, prospective, cohort study on extracorporeal CO2 removal in a large metropolis area

Background

Extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO₂R) is a promising technique for the management of acute respiratory failure, but with a limited level of evidence to support its use outside clinical trials and/or data collection initiatives. We report a collaborative initiative in a large metropolis.

Methods

To assess on a structural basis the rate of utilization as well as efficacy and safety parameters of 2 ECCO₂R devices in 10 intensive care units (ICU) during a 2-year period.

Results

Seventy patients were recruited in 10 voluntary and specifically trained centers. The median utilization rate was 0.19 patient/month/center (min 0.04; max 1.20). ECCO₂R was started under invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in 59 patients and non-invasive ventilation in 11 patients. The Hemolung Respiratory Assist System (Alung) was used in 53 patients and the iLA Activve iLA kit (Xenios Novalung) in 17 patients. Main indications were ultraprotective ventilation for ARDS patients (n = 24), shortening the duration of IMV in COPD patients (n = 21), preventing intubation in COPD patients (n = 9), and controlling hypercapnia and dynamic hyperinflation in mechanically ventilated patients with severe acute asthma (n = 6). A reduction in median V_T was observed in ARDS patients from 5.9 to 4.1 ml/kg (p <0.001). A reduction in PaCO₂ values was observed in AE-COPD patients from 67.5 to 51 mmHg (p< 0.001). Median duration of ECCO₂R was 5 days (IQR 3–8). Reasons for ECCO₂R discontinuation were improvement (n = 33), ECCO₂R-related complications (n = 18), limitation of life-sustaining therapies or measures decision (n = 10), and death (n = 9). Main adverse events were hemolysis (n = 21), bleeding (n = 17), and lung membrane clotting (n = 11), with different profiles between the devices. Thirty-five deaths occurred during the ICU stay, 3 of which being ECCO₂R-related.

Conclusions

Based on a registry, we report a low rate of ECCO₂R device utilization, mainly in severe COPD and ARDS patients. Physiological efficacy was confirmed in these two populations. We confirmed safety concerns such as hemolysis, bleeding, and thrombosis, with different profiles between the devices. Such results could help to design future studies aiming to enhance safety, to demonstrate a still-lacking strong clinical benefit of ECCO₂R, and to guide the choice between different devices.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: Identifier: NCT02965079 retrospectively registered https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02965079

Extracorporeal Life Support for Adults With Respiratory Failure and Related Indications: A Review

IMPORTANCE

The substantial growth over the last decade in the use of extracorporeal life support for adults with acute respiratory failure reveals an enthusiasm for the technology not always consistent with the evidence. However, recent high-quality data, primarily in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome, have made extracorporeal life support more widely accepted in clinical practice.

OBSERVATIONS

Clinical trials of extracorporeal life support for acute respiratory failure in adults in the 1970s and 1990s failed to demonstrate benefit, reducing use of the intervention for decades and relegating it to a small number of centers. Nonetheless, technological improvements in extracorporeal support made it safer to use. Interest in extracorporeal life support increased with the confluence of 2 events in 2009: (1) the publication of a randomized clinical trial of extracorporeal life support for acute respiratory failure and (2) the use of extracorporeal life support in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome during the influenza A(H1N1) pandemic. In 2018, a randomized clinical trial in patients with very severe acute respiratory distress syndrome demonstrated a seemingly large decrease in mortality from 46% to 35%, but this difference was not statistically significant. However, a Bayesian post hoc analysis of this trial and a subsequent meta-analysis together suggested that extracorporeal life support was beneficial for patients with very severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. As the evidence supporting the use of extracorporeal life support increases, its indications are expanding to being a bridge to lung transplantation and the management of patients with pulmonary vascular disease who have right-sided heart failure. Extracorporeal life support is now an acceptable form of organ support in clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The role of extracorporeal life support in the management of adults with acute respiratory failure is being redefined by advances in technology and increasing evidence of its effectiveness. Future developments in the field will result from technological advances, an increased understanding of the physiology and biology of extracorporeal support, and increased knowledge of how it might benefit the treatment of a variety of clinical conditions.

When the momentum has gone: what will be the role of extracorporeal lung support in the future?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There has been expanding interest in and use of extracorporeal support in respiratory failure concurrent with technological advances and predominantly observational data demonstrating improved outcomes. However, until there is more available data from rigorous, high-quality randomized studies, the future of extracorporeal support remains uncertain.

RECENT FINDINGS

Outcomes for patients supported with extracorporeal devices continue to show favorable trends. There are several large randomized controlled trials that are in various stages of planning or completion for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO2R) in the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), which may help clarify the role of this technology for these disease processes, and which stand to have a significant impact on a large proportion of patients with acute respiratory failure. Novel applications of extracorporeal lung support include optimization of donor organ quality through ex-vivo perfusion and extracorporeal cross-circulation, allowing for multimodal therapeutic interventions.

SUMMARY

Despite the ongoing rise in ECMO use for acute respiratory failure, its true value will not be known until more information is gleaned from prospective randomized controlled trials. Additionally, there are modalities beyond the current considerations for extracorporeal support that have the potential to revolutionize respiratory failure, particularly in the realm of chronic lung disease and lung transplantation.

Acute life-threatening hypoxemia during mechanical ventilation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To describe current evidence-based practice in the management of acute life-threatening hypoxemia in mechanically ventilated patients and some of the methods used to individualize the care of the patient.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patients with acute life-threatening hypoxemia will often meet criteria for severe ARDS, for which there are only a few treatment strategies that have been shown to improve survival outcomes. Recent findings have increased our knowledge of the physiological effects of spontaneous breathing and the application of PEEP. Additionally, the use of advanced bedside monitoring has a promising future in the management of hypoxemic patients to fine-tune the ventilator and to evaluate the individual patient response to therapy.

SUMMARY

Treating the patient with acute life-threatening hypoxemia during mechanical ventilation should begin with an evidence-based approach, with the goal of improving oxygenation and minimizing the harmful effects of mechanical ventilation. The use of advanced monitoring and the application of simple maneuvers at the bedside may assist clinicians to better individualize treatment and improve clinical outcomes.

Management and outcomes of acute respiratory distress syndrome patients with and without comorbid conditions

Rationale

The standard of care for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has been developed based on studies that usually excluded patients with major comorbidities.

Objectives

To describe treatments and outcomes according to comorbidities in patients with ARDS admitted to 19 ICUs (1997–2014).

Methods

Patients were grouped based on comorbidities. Determinants of day-28 mortality were identified by multivariable Cox analysis stratified on center.

Measurements and main results

Among 4953 ARDS patients, 2545 (51.4%) had major comorbidities; the proportion with major comorbidities increased after 2008. Hematological malignancy was associated with severe ARDS and rescue therapies for refractory hypoxemia. COPD, HIV infection, and hematological malignancy were associated with a lower likelihood of invasive mechanical ventilation on the admission day. Admission-day SOFA score was higher in patients with major comorbidities, who more often received vasopressors, dialysis, or treatment-limitation decisions. Day-28 mortality was 33.7% overall, 27.2% in patients without major comorbidities, and 31.1% (COPD) to 56% (hematological malignancy) in patients with major comorbidities. By multivariable analysis, mortality was lower in patients with COPD and higher in those with chronic heart failure, solid tumors, or hematological malignancies. Mortality was independently associated with P_aO₂/F_iO₂ and PaCO₂ on day 1, ARDS of pulmonary origin, worse SOFA score, and ICU-acquired events.

Conclusions

Half the patients with ARDS had major comorbidities, which were associated with severe ARDS, multiple organ dysfunction, and day-28 mortality. These findings do not support the exclusion of ARDS patients with severe comorbidities from randomized clinical trials. Trials in ARDS patients with whatever comorbidities are warranted.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00134-018-5209-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Impact of flow and temperature on patient comfort during respiratory support by high-flow nasal cannula

BACKGROUND

The high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) delivers up to 60 l/min of humidified air/oxygen blend at a temperature close to that of the human body. In this study, we tested whether higher temperature and flow decrease patient comfort. In more severe patients, instead, we hypothesized that higher flow might be associated with improved comfort.

METHODS

A prospective, randomized, cross-over study was performed on 40 acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) patients (PaO₂/FiO₂ ≤ 300 + pulmonary infiltrates + exclusion of cardiogenic edema) supported by HFNC. The primary outcome was the assessment of patient comfort during HFNC delivery at increasing flow and temperature. Two flows (30 and 60 l/min), each combined with two temperatures (31 and 37 °C), were randomly applied for 20 min (four steps per patient), leaving clinical FiO₂ unchanged. Toward the end of each step, the following were recorded: comfort by Visual Numerical Scale ranging between 1 (extreme discomfort) and 5 (very comfortable), together with respiratory parameters. A subgroup of more severe patients was defined by clinical FiO₂ ≥ 45%.

RESULTS

Patient comfort was reported as significantly higher during steps at the lower temperature (31 °C) in comparison to 37 °C, with the HFNC set at both 30 and 60 l/min (p < 0.0001). Higher flow, however, was not associated with poorer comfort. In the subgroup of patients with clinical FiO₂ ≥ 45%, both lower temperature (31 °C) and higher HFNC flow (60 l/min) led to higher comfort (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

HFNC temperature seems to significantly impact the comfort of AHRF patients: for equal flow, lower temperature could be more comfortable. Higher flow does not decrease patient comfort; at variance, it improves comfort in the more severely hypoxemic patient.

Impact of flow and temperature on patient comfort during respiratory support by high-flow nasal cannula

BACKGROUND

The high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) delivers up to 60 l/min of humidified air/oxygen blend at a temperature close to that of the human body. In this study, we tested whether higher temperature and flow decrease patient comfort. In more severe patients, instead, we hypothesized that higher flow might be associated with improved comfort.

METHODS

A prospective, randomized, cross-over study was performed on 40 acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) patients (PaO₂/FiO₂ ≤ 300 + pulmonary infiltrates + exclusion of cardiogenic edema) supported by HFNC. The primary outcome was the assessment of patient comfort during HFNC delivery at increasing flow and temperature. Two flows (30 and 60 l/min), each combined with two temperatures (31 and 37 °C), were randomly applied for 20 min (four steps per patient), leaving clinical FiO₂ unchanged. Toward the end of each step, the following were recorded: comfort by Visual Numerical Scale ranging between 1 (extreme discomfort) and 5 (very comfortable), together with respiratory parameters. A subgroup of more severe patients was defined by clinical FiO₂ ≥ 45%.

RESULTS

Patient comfort was reported as significantly higher during steps at the lower temperature (31 °C) in comparison to 37 °C, with the HFNC set at both 30 and 60 l/min (p < 0.0001). Higher flow, however, was not associated with poorer comfort. In the subgroup of patients with clinical FiO₂ ≥ 45%, both lower temperature (31 °C) and higher HFNC flow (60 l/min) led to higher comfort (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

HFNC temperature seems to significantly impact the comfort of AHRF patients: for equal flow, lower temperature could be more comfortable. Higher flow does not decrease patient comfort; at variance, it improves comfort in the more severely hypoxemic patient.

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Advances in Diagnosis and Treatment

IMPORTANCE

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a life-threatening form of respiratory failure that affects approximately 200 000 patients each year in the United States, resulting in nearly 75 000 deaths annually. Globally, ARDS accounts for 10% of intensive care unit admissions, representing more than 3 million patients with ARDS annually.

OBJECTIVE

To review advances in diagnosis and treatment of ARDS over the last 5 years.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from 2012 to 2017 focusing on randomized clinical trials, meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and clinical practice guidelines. Articles were identified for full text review with manual review of bibliographies generating additional references.

FINDINGS

After screening 1662 citations, 31 articles detailing major advances in the diagnosis or treatment of ARDS were selected. The Berlin definition proposed 3 categories of ARDS based on the severity of hypoxemia: mild (200 mm Hg<Pao2/Fio2≤300 mm Hg), moderate (100 mm Hg<Pao2/Fio2≤200 mm Hg), and severe (Pao2/Fio2 ≤100 mm Hg), along with explicit criteria related to timing of the syndrome's onset, origin of edema, and the chest radiograph findings. The Berlin definition has significantly greater predictive validity for mortality than the prior American-European Consensus Conference definition. Clinician interpretation of the origin of edema and chest radiograph criteria may be less reliable in making a diagnosis of ARDS. The cornerstone of management remains mechanical ventilation, with a goal to minimize ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI). Aspirin was not effective in preventing ARDS in patients at high-risk for the syndrome. Adjunctive interventions to further minimize VILI, such as prone positioning in patients with a Pao2/Fio2 ratio less than 150 mm Hg, were associated with a significant mortality benefit whereas others (eg, extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal) remain experimental. Pharmacologic therapies such as β2 agonists, statins, and keratinocyte growth factor, which targeted pathophysiologic alterations in ARDS, were not beneficial and demonstrated possible harm. Recent guidelines on mechanical ventilation in ARDS provide evidence-based recommendations related to 6 interventions, including low tidal volume and inspiratory pressure ventilation, prone positioning, high-frequency oscillatory ventilation, higher vs lower positive end-expiratory pressure, lung recruitment maneuvers, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The Berlin definition of acute respiratory distress syndrome addressed limitations of the American-European Consensus Conference definition, but poor reliability of some criteria may contribute to underrecognition by clinicians. No pharmacologic treatments aimed at the underlying pathology have been shown to be effective, and management remains supportive with lung-protective mechanical ventilation. Guidelines on mechanical ventilation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome can assist clinicians in delivering evidence-based interventions that may lead to improved outcomes.

Do we need randomized clinical trials in extracorporeal respiratory support? Yes

Extracorporeal respiratory support, also known as extracorporeal gas exchange, may be used to rescue the most severe forms of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure with high blood flow venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Alternatively, lower flow extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal might be applied to reduce the intensity of mechanical ventilation in patients with less severe forms of the disease. However, critical reading of the results of the randomized trials and case series published to date reveals major methodological biases. Older trials are not relevant anymore since the ECMO circuitry was not heparin-coated leading to severe hemorrhagic complications due to high levels of anticoagulation, and because extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and control group patients did not receive lung-protective ventilation. Alternatively, in the more recent CESAR trial, many patients randomized to the ECMO arm did not receive ECMO and no standardized protocol for lung-protective mechanical ventilation existed in the control group. Since these techniques are costly and associated with potentially serious adverse events, there is an urgent need for high-quality data, for which the cornerstone remains randomized controlled trials.

Respiratory support in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: an expert opinion

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a common condition in intensive care unit patients and remains a major concern, with mortality rates of around 30–45% and considerable long-term morbidity. Respiratory support in these patients must be optimized to ensure adequate gas exchange while minimizing the risks of ventilator-induced lung injury. The aim of this expert opinion document is to review the available clinical evidence related to ventilator support and adjuvant therapies in order to provide evidence-based and experience-based clinical recommendations for the management of patients with ARDS.

Predicting Major Adverse Kidney Events among Critically Ill Adults Using the Electronic Health Record

Prediction of major adverse kidney events in critically ill patients may help target therapy, allow risk adjustment, and facilitate the conduct of clinical trials. In a cohort comprised of all critically ill adults admitted to five intensive care units at a single tertiary care center over one year, we developed a logistic regression model for the outcome of Major Adverse Kidney Events within 30 days (MAKE30), the composite of persistent renal dysfunction, new renal replacement therapy (RRT), and in-hospital mortality. Proposed risk factors for the MAKE30 outcome were selected a priori and included age, race, gender, University Health System Consortium (UHC) expected mortality, baseline creatinine, volume of isotonic crystalloid fluid received in the prior 24 h, admission service, intensive care unit (ICU), source of admission, mechanical ventilation or receipt of vasopressors within 24 h of ICU admission, renal replacement therapy prior to ICU admission, acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease as defined by baseline creatinine value, and renal failure as defined by the Elixhauser index. Among 10,983 patients in the study population, 1489 patients (13.6%) met the MAKE30 endpoint. The strongest independent predictors of MAKE30 were UHC expected mortality (OR 2.32 [95%CI 2.06-2.61]) and presence of acute kidney injury at ICU admission (OR 4.98 [95%CI 4.12-6.03]). The model had strong predictive properties including excellent discrimination with a bootstrap-corrected area-under-the-curve (AUC) of 0.903, and high precision of calibration with a mean absolute error prediction of 1.7%. The MAKE30 composite outcome can be reliably predicted from factors present within 24 h of ICU admission using data derived from the electronic health record.