High-Flow Nasal Oxygen for Severe Hypoxemia: Oxygenation Response and Outcome in Patients with COVID-19

Definitions of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Present Recommendations and Challenges

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is an acute inflammatory process resulting in diffuse lung injury precipitated by an underlying risk factor. However, current definitions may pose barriers to the accurate diagnosis of this syndrome. These include changes in risk factors and associated disease evolution of ARDS, changes in contemporary clinical practice, and access to diagnostic tools required to diagnose ARDS in resource-limited settings. A consensus conference has proposed changes for an expanded global definition of ARDS. In this review article, we review challenges in defining ARDS and present recommendations of the global definition of ARDS.

Clinical review of non-invasive ventilation

Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) is the mainstay to treat patients who need augmentation of ventilation for acute and chronic forms of respiratory failure. The last several decades have witnessed an extension of the indications for NIV to a variety of acute and chronic lung diseases. Evolving advancements in technology and personalised approaches to patient care make it feasible to prioritise patient-centred care models that deliver home-based management using telemonitoring and telemedicine systems support. These trends may improve patient outcomes, reduce healthcare costs and improve the quality of life for patients who suffer from chronic diseases that precipitate respiratory failure.

The respiratory oxygenation index for identifying the risk of orotracheal intubation in COVID-19 patients receiving high-flow nasal cannula oxygen

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether the respiratory oxygenation index (ROX index) measured after the start of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy can help identify the need for intubation in patients with acute respiratory failure due to coronavirus disease 2019.

METHODS

This retrospective, observational, multicenter study was conducted at the intensive care units of six Brazilian hospitals from March to December 2020. The primary outcome was the need for intubation up to 7 days after starting the high-flow nasal cannula.

RESULTS

A total of 444 patients were included in the study, and 261 (58.7%) were subjected to intubation. An analysis of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) showed that the ability to discriminate between successful and failed high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy within 7 days was greater for the ROX index measured at 24 hours (AUROC 0.80; 95%CI 0.76 - 0.84). The median interval between high-flow nasal cannula initiation and intubation was 24 hours (24 - 72), and the most accurate predictor of intubation obtained before 24 hours was the ROX index measured at 12 hours (AUROC 0.75; 95%CI 0.70 - 0.79). Kaplan-Meier curves revealed a greater probability of intubation within 7 days in patients with a ROX index ≤ 5.54 at 12 hours (hazard ratio 3.07; 95%CI 2.24 - 4.20) and ≤ 5.96 at 24 hours (hazard ratio 5.15; 95%CI 3.65 - 7.27).

CONCLUSION

The ROX index can aid in the early identification of patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19 who will progress to the failure of high-flow nasal cannula supportive therapy and the need for intubation.

Post-pandemic acute respiratory distress syndrome: A New Global Definition with extension to lower-resource regions

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), first described in 1967, is characterized by acute respiratory failure causing profound hypoxemia, decreased pulmonary compliance, and bilateral CXR infiltrates. After several descriptions, the Berlin definition was adopted in 2012, which established three categories of severity according to hypoxemia (mild, moderate and severe), specified temporal aspects for diagnosis, and incorporated the use of non-invasive ventilation. The COVID-19 pandemic led to changes in ARDS management, focusing on continuous monitoring of oxygenation and on utilization of high-flow oxygen therapy and lung ultrasound. In 2021, a New Global Definition based on the Berlin definition of ARDS was proposed, which included a category for non-intubated patients, considered the use of SpO2, and established no particular requirement for oxygenation support in regions with limited resources. Although debates persist, the continuous evolution seeks to adapt to clinical and epidemiological needs, and to the search of personalized treatments.

Noninvasive respiratory support in the emergency department: Controversies and state-of-the-art recommendations

Acute respiratory failure is a common reason for emergency department visits and hospital admissions. Diverse underlying physiologic abnormalities lead to unique aspects about the most common causes of acute respiratory failure: acute decompensated heart failure, acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and acute de novo hypoxemic respiratory failure. Noninvasive respiratory support strategies are increasingly used methods to support work of breathing and improve gas exchange abnormalities to improve outcomes relative to conventional oxygen therapy or invasive mechanical ventilation. Noninvasive respiratory support includes noninvasive positive pressure ventilation and nasal high flow, each with unique physiologic mechanisms. This paper will review the physiology of respiratory failure and noninvasive respiratory support modalities and offer data and guideline-driven recommendations in the context of key clinical controversies.

Asymmetrical high-flow nasal cannula performs similarly to standard interface in patients with acute hypoxemic post-extubation respiratory failure: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Standard high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is a respiratory support device widely used to manage post-extubation hypoxemic acute respiratory failure (hARF) due to greater comfort, oxygenation, alveolar recruitment, humidification, and reduction of dead space, as compared to conventional oxygen therapy. On the contrary, the effects of the new asymmetrical HFNC interface (Optiflow® Duet system (Fisher & Paykel, Healthcare, Auckland, New Zealand) is still under discussion. Our aim is investigating whether the use of asymmetrical HFNC interface presents any relevant difference, compared with the standard configuration, on lung aeration (as assessed by end-expiratory lung impedance (EELI) measured by electrical impedance tomography (EIT)), diaphragm ultrasound thickening fraction (TFdi) and excursion (DE), ventilatory efficiency (estimated by corrected minute ventilation (MV)), gas exchange, dyspnea, and comfort.

METHODS

Pilot physiological crossover randomized controlled study enrolling 20 adults admitted to the Intensive Care unit, invasively ventilated for at least 24 h, and developing post-extubation hARF, i.e., PaO2/set FiO2 < 300 mmHg during Venturi mask (VM) within 120 min after extubation. Each HFNC configuration was applied in a randomized 60 min sequence at a flow rate of 60 L/min.

RESULTS

Global EELI, TFdi, DE, ventilatory efficiency, gas exchange and dyspnea were not significantly different, while comfort was greater during asymmetrical HFNC support, as compared to standard interface (10 [7-10] and 8 [7-9], p-value 0.044).

CONCLUSIONS

In post-extubation hARF, the use of the asymmetrical HFNC, as compared to standard HFNC interface, slightly improved patient comfort without affecting lung aeration, diaphragm activity, ventilatory efficiency, dyspnea and gas exchange.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

ClinicalTrial.gov.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05838326 (01/05/2023).

NEW & NOTEWORTHY

The asymmetrical high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (Optiflow® Duet system (Fisher & Paykel, Healthcare, Auckland, New Zealand) provides greater comfort as compared to standard interface; while their performance in term of lung aeration, diaphragm activity, ventilatory efficiency, dyspnea, and gas exchange is similar.

The Predictive Validity of the Berlin Definition of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome for Patients With COVID-19-Related Respiratory Failure Treated With High-Flow Nasal Oxygen: A Multicenter, Prospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVES

The Berlin definition of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) was constructed for patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) with consideration given to issues related to reliability, feasibility, and validity. Notwithstanding, patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF) may be treated with high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) and may not fall within the scope of the original definition. We aimed to evaluate the predictive validity of the Berlin definition in HFNO-treated patients with COVID-19-related respiratory failure who otherwise met ARDS criteria.

DESIGN

Multicenter, prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Five ICUs of five centers in Argentina from March 2020 to September 2021.

PATIENTS

We consecutively included HFNO-treated patients older than 18 years with confirmed COVID-19-related ARF, a Pa o2 /F io2 of less than 300 mm Hg, bilateral infiltrates on imaging, and worsening respiratory symptoms for less than 1 week.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We evaluated the predictive validity of mortality at day 28 using the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC), compared the predictive validity across subgroups, and characterized relevant clinical outcomes. We screened 1,231 patients and included 696 ARDS patients [30 (4%) mild, 380 (55%) moderate, and 286 (41%) severe]. For the study cohort, the AUC for mortality at day 28 was 0.606 (95% CI, 0.561-0.651) with the AUC for subgroups being similar to that of the overall cohort. Two hundred fifty-six patients (37%) received IMV. By day 28, 142 patients (21%) had died, of whom 81 (57%) had severe ARDS. Mortality occurred primarily in patients who were transitioned to IMV.

CONCLUSIONS

The predictive validity of the Berlin ARDS definition was similar for HFNO-treated patients as compared with the original population of invasively ventilated patients. Our findings support the extension of the Berlin definition to HFNO-treated patients with ARDS.

A New Global Definition of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Background: Since publication of the 2012 Berlin definition of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), several developments have supported the need for an expansion of the definition, including the use of high-flow nasal oxygen, the expansion of the use of pulse oximetry in place of arterial blood gases, the use of ultrasound for chest imaging, and the need for applicability in resource-limited settings. Methods: A consensus conference of 32 critical care ARDS experts was convened, had six virtual meetings (June 2021 to March 2022), and subsequently obtained input from members of several critical care societies. The goal was to develop a definition that would 1) identify patients with the currently accepted conceptual framework for ARDS, 2) facilitate rapid ARDS diagnosis for clinical care and research, 3) be applicable in resource-limited settings, 4) be useful for testing specific therapies, and 5) be practical for communication to patients and caregivers. Results: The committee made four main recommendations: 1) include high-flow nasal oxygen with a minimum flow rate of ⩾30 L/min; 2) use PaO2:FiO2 ⩽ 300 mm Hg or oxygen saturation as measured by pulse oximetry SpO2:FiO2 ⩽ 315 (if oxygen saturation as measured by pulse oximetry is ⩽97%) to identify hypoxemia; 3) retain bilateral opacities for imaging criteria but add ultrasound as an imaging modality, especially in resource-limited areas; and 4) in resource-limited settings, do not require positive end-expiratory pressure, oxygen flow rate, or specific respiratory support devices. Conclusions: We propose a new global definition of ARDS that builds on the Berlin definition. The recommendations also identify areas for future research, including the need for prospective assessments of the feasibility, reliability, and prognostic validity of the proposed global definition.

Personalized Noninvasive Respiratory Support in the Perioperative Setting: State of the Art and Future Perspectives

Background: Noninvasive respiratory support (NRS), including high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (HFNOT), noninvasive ventilation (NIV) and continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), are routinely used in the perioperative period. Objectives: This narrative review provides an overview on the perioperative use of NRS. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative respiratory support is discussed, along with potential future areas of research. Results: During induction of anesthesia, in selected patients at high risk of difficult intubation, NIV is associated with improved gas exchange and reduced risk of postoperative respiratory complications. HFNOT demonstrated an improvement in oxygenation. Evidence on the intraoperative use of NRS is limited. Compared with conventional oxygenation, HFNOT is associated with a reduced risk of hypoxemia during procedural sedation, and recent data indicate a possible role for HFNOT for intraoperative apneic oxygenation in specific surgical contexts. After extubation, "preemptive" NIV and HFNOT in unselected cohorts do not affect clinical outcome. Postoperative "curative" NIV in high-risk patients and among those exhibiting signs of respiratory failure can reduce reintubation rate, especially after abdominal surgery. Data on postoperative "curative" HFNOT are limited. Conclusions: There is increasing evidence on the perioperative use of NRS. Use of NRS should be tailored based on the patient's specific characteristics and type of surgery, aimed at a personalized cost-effective approach.

Ventilatory Management of Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Due to SARS-CoV-2

The emergence of the new SARS-CoV-2 in December 2019 caused a worldwide pandemic of the resultant disease, COVID-19. There was a massive surge in admissions to intensive care units (ICU), notably of patients with hypoxaemic acute respiratory failure. In these patients, optimal oxygen therapy was crucial. In this article, we discuss tracheal intubation to provide mechanical ventilation in patients with hypoxaemic acute respiratory failure due to SARS-CoV-2. We first describe the pathophysiology of respiratory anomalies leading to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to infection with SARS-CoV-2, and then briefly review management, focusing particularly on the ventilation strategy. Overall, the ventilatory management of ARDS due to SARS-CoV-2 infection is largely the same as that applied in ARDS from other causes, and lung-protective ventilation is recommended. The difference lies in the initial clinical presentation, with profound hypoxaemia often observed concomitantly with near-normal pulmonary compliance.

Subphenotypes in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome treated with high-flow oxygen

BACKGROUND

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) subphenotypes differ in outcomes and treatment responses. Subphenotypes in high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO)-treated ARDS patients have not been investigated.

OBJECTIVES

To identify biological subphenotypes in HFNO-treated ARDS patients.

METHODS

Secondary analysis of a prospective multicenter observational study including ARDS patients supported with HFNO. Plasma inflammation markers (interleukin [IL]-6, IL-8, and IL-33 and soluble suppression of tumorigenicity-2 [sST2]) and lung epithelial (receptor for advanced glycation end products [RAGE] and surfactant protein D [SP-D]) and endothelial (angiopoietin-2 [Ang-2]) injury were measured. These biomarkers and bicarbonate were used in K-means cluster analysis to identify subphenotypes. Logistic regression was performed on biomarker combinations to predict clustering. We chose the model with the best AUROC and the lowest number of variables. This model was used to describe the HAIS (High-flow ARDS Inflammatory Subphenotype) score.

RESULTS

Among 41 HFNO patients, two subphenotypes were identified. Hyperinflammatory subphenotype (n = 17) showed higher biomarker levels than hypoinflammatory (n = 24). Despite similar baseline characteristics, the hyperinflammatory subphenotype had higher 60-day mortality (47 vs 8.3% p = 0.014) and longer ICU length of stay (22.0 days [18.0-30.0] vs 39.5 [25.5-60.0], p = 0.034). The HAIS score, based on IL-8 and sST2, accurately distinguished subphenotypes (AUROC 0.96 [95%CI: 0.90-1.00]). A HAIS score ≥ 7.45 was predictor of hyperinflammatory subphenotype.

CONCLUSION

ARDS patients treated with HFNO exhibit two biological subphenotypes that have similar clinical characteristics, but hyperinflammatory patients have worse outcomes. The HAIS score may identify patients with hyperinflammatory subphenotype and might be used for enrichment strategies in future clinical trials.

Effect of a pre-emptive 2-hour session of high-flow nasal oxygen on postoperative oxygenation after major gynaecologic surgery: a randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUND

We aimed at determining whether a 2-h session of high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) immediately after extubation improves oxygen exchange after major gynaecological surgery in the Trendelenburg position in adult female patients.

METHODS

In this single-centre, open-label, randomised trial, patients who underwent major gynaecological surgery were randomised to HFNO or conventional oxygen treatment with a Venturi mask. The primary outcome was the Pao2/FiO2 ratio after 2 h of treatment. Secondary outcomes included lung ultrasound score, diaphragm thickening fraction, dyspnoea, ventilatory frequency, Paco2, the percentage of patients with impaired gas exchange (Pao2/FiO2 ≤40 kPa) after 2 h of treatment, and postoperative pulmonary complications at 30 days.

RESULTS

A total of 83 patients were included (42 in the HFNO group and 41 in the conventional treatment group). After 2 h of treatment, median (inter-quartile range) Pao2/FiO2 was 52.9 (47.9-65.2) kPa in the HFNO group and 45.7 (36.4 -55.9) kPa in the conventional treatment group (mean difference 8.7 kPa [95% CI: 3.4 to 13.9], P=0.003). The lung ultrasound score was lower in the HFNO group than in the conventional treatment group (9 [6-10] vs 12 [10-14], P<0.001), mostly because of the difference of the score in dorsal areas (7 [6-8] vs 10 [9-10], P<0.001). The percentage of patients with impaired gas exchange was lower in the HFNO group than in the conventional treatment group (5% vs 37%, P<0.001). All other secondary outcomes were not different between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients who underwent major gynaecological surgery, a pre-emptive 2-h session of HFNO after extubation improved postoperative oxygen exchange and reduced atelectasis compared with a conventional oxygen treatment strategy.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT04566419.

The Current Situation of Anaesthesia for Hysteroscopy in Mainland China: A National Survey

Purpose: The need for anaesthesia or analgesia for performing hysteroscopy remains debatable. This study aimed to conduct an overview of the situation of anaesthesia for hysteroscopy in mainland China. Methods: Two questionnaires were separately designed for anaesthesiologists and gynaecologists and distributed to every medical institution that performed hysteroscopic procedures on patients with infertility in mainland China. Electronic questionnaires were distributed via WeChat, and data on anaesthesia regimen, monitoring parameters, procedure number, and other information were collected. Results: Reproductive technology is conducted by 536 institutions in mainland China. The survey received 491 responses from anaesthetists (91.6%) and 436 from gynaecologists (81.3%). In 2021, 552,225 hysteroscopies were conducted in 268 medical centres. The average percentage of hysteroscopy under anaesthesia is 63.8% in 2021, wherein 47.3% of institutions have an anaesthesia percentage of >75%. Propofol and opioid analgesics, such as fentanyl and sufentanil, were the most commonly used intravenous anaesthetics. All sedations were performed by anaesthesiologists. Monitoring parameters included pulse oxygen saturation (98.9%), electrocardiogram (91.6%) and noninvasive blood pressure (91.3%). An anaesthesiologist-to-operating room ratio of <1 was observed in 31.3% of medical institutions. Surprisingly, 52.4% of medical institutions performing hysteroscopy had no postanaesthesia care unit (PACU). Most institutions with PACU were equipped with independent oxygen sources, suction and monitors. Both rigid and flexible hysteroscopes (rigid hysteroscope, 45.1%; flexible hysteroscope, 4.5%; both types, 50.4%) were used, and the hysteroscopic diameter was ≤5 mm in 60.3% of medical centres. Conclusions: China performs a large number of hysteroscopies, and sedation is the most frequently used anesthesia regimen. However, issues such as inadequate emergency support devices, insufficient personnel and weak resuscitation management after anaesthesia, have been observed.

The Use of High-Flow Nasal Cannula and Non-Invasive Mechanical Ventilation in the Management of COVID-19 Patients: A Prospective Study

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and ventilator-delivered non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV) were used to treat acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to COVID-19 pneumonia, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), due to lack of ventilators and manpower resources despite the paucity of data regarding their efficacy. This prospective study aimed to analyse the efficacy of HFNC versus NIV in the management of COVID-19 ARDS. A total of 88 RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 patients with moderate ARDS were recruited. Linear regression and generalized estimating equations (GEEs) were used for trends in vital parameters over time. A total of 37 patients were on HFNC, and 51 were on NIV. Patients in the HFNC group stayed slightly but not significantly longer in the ICU as compared to their NIV counterparts (HFNC vs. NIV: 8.00 (4.0-12.0) days vs. 7.00 (2.0-12.0) days; p = 0.055). Intubation rates, complications, and mortality were similar in both groups. The switch to HFNC from NIV was 5.8%, while 37.8% required a switch to NIV from HFNC. The resolution of respiratory alkalosis was better with NIV. We conclude that in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia with moderate ARDS, the duration of treatment in the ICU, intubation rate, and mortality did not differ significantly with the use of HFNC or NIV for respiratory support.

Evaluating construct validity of computable acute respiratory distress syndrome definitions in adults hospitalized with COVID-19: an electronic health records based approach

BACKGROUND

Evolving ARDS epidemiology and management during COVID-19 have prompted calls to reexamine the construct validity of Berlin criteria, which have been rarely evaluated in real-world data. We developed a Berlin ARDS definition (EHR-Berlin) computable in electronic health records (EHR) to (1) assess its construct validity, and (2) assess how expanding its criteria affected validity.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study at two tertiary care hospitals with one EHR, among adults hospitalized with COVID-19 February 2020-March 2021. We assessed five candidate definitions for ARDS: the EHR-Berlin definition modeled on Berlin criteria, and four alternatives informed by recent proposals to expand criteria and include patients on high-flow oxygen (EHR-Alternative 1), relax imaging criteria (EHR-Alternatives 2-3), and extend timing windows (EHR-Alternative 4). We evaluated two aspects of construct validity for the EHR-Berlin definition: (1) criterion validity: agreement with manual ARDS classification by experts, available in 175 patients; (2) predictive validity: relationships with hospital mortality, assessed by Pearson r and by area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC). We assessed predictive validity and timing of identification of EHR-Berlin definition compared to alternative definitions.

RESULTS

Among 765 patients, mean (SD) age was 57 (18) years and 471 (62%) were male. The EHR-Berlin definition classified 171 (22%) patients as ARDS, which had high agreement with manual classification (kappa 0.85), and was associated with mortality (Pearson r = 0.39; AUROC 0.72, 95% CI 0.68, 0.77). In comparison, EHR-Alternative 1 classified 219 (29%) patients as ARDS, maintained similar relationships to mortality (r = 0.40; AUROC 0.74, 95% CI 0.70, 0.79, Delong test P = 0.14), and identified patients earlier in their hospitalization (median 13 vs. 15 h from admission, Wilcoxon signed-rank test P < 0.001). EHR-Alternative 3, which removed imaging criteria, had similar correlation (r = 0.41) but better discrimination for mortality (AUROC 0.76, 95% CI 0.72, 0.80; P = 0.036), and identified patients median 2 h (P < 0.001) from admission.

CONCLUSIONS

The EHR-Berlin definition can enable ARDS identification with high criterion validity, supporting large-scale study and surveillance. There are opportunities to expand the Berlin criteria that preserve predictive validity and facilitate earlier identification.

Broadening the Berlin definition of ARDS to patients receiving high-flow nasal oxygen: an observational study in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19

BACKGROUND

High-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) is increasingly used in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. It is uncertain whether a broadened Berlin definition of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), in which ARDS can be diagnosed in patients who are not receiving ventilation, results in similar groups of patients receiving HFNO as in patients receiving ventilation.

METHODS

We applied a broadened definition of ARDS in a multicenter, observational study in adult critically ill patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), wherein the requirement for a minimal level of 5 cm H₂O PEEP with ventilation is replaced by a minimal level of airflow rate with HFNO, and compared baseline characteristics and outcomes between patients receiving HFNO and patients receiving ventilation. The primary endpoint was ICU mortality. We also compared outcomes in risk for death groups using the PaO₂/FiO₂ cutoffs as used successfully in the original definition of ARDS. Secondary endpoints were hospital mortality; mortality on days 28 and 90; need for ventilation within 7 days in patients that started with HFNO; the number of days free from HFNO or ventilation; and ICU and hospital length of stay.

RESULTS

Of 728 included patients, 229 patients started with HFNO and 499 patients with ventilation. All patients fulfilled the broadened Berlin definition of ARDS. Patients receiving HFNO had lower disease severity scores and lower PaO₂/FiO₂ than patients receiving ventilation. ICU mortality was lower in receiving HFNO (22.7 vs 35.6%; p = 0.001). Using PaO₂/FiO₂ cutoffs for mild, moderate and severe arterial hypoxemia created groups with an ICU mortality of 16.7%, 22.0%, and 23.5% (p = 0.906) versus 19.1%, 37.9% and 41.4% (p = 0.002), in patients receiving HFNO versus patients receiving ventilation, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a broadened definition of ARDS may facilitate an earlier diagnosis of ARDS in patients receiving HFNO; however, ARDS patients receiving HFNO and ARDS patients receiving ventilation have distinct baseline characteristics and mortality rates.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT04719182).

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.

Personalized Respiratory Support in ARDS: A Physiology-to-Bedside Review

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a leading cause of disability and mortality worldwide, and while no specific etiologic interventions have been shown to improve outcomes, noninvasive and invasive respiratory support strategies are life-saving interventions that allow time for lung recovery. However, the inappropriate management of these strategies, which neglects the unique features of respiratory, lung, and chest wall mechanics may result in disease progression, such as patient self-inflicted lung injury during spontaneous breathing or by ventilator-induced lung injury during invasive mechanical ventilation. ARDS characteristics are highly heterogeneous; therefore, a physiology-based approach is strongly advocated to titrate the delivery and management of respiratory support strategies to match patient characteristics and needs to limit ARDS progression. Several tools have been implemented in clinical practice to aid the clinician in identifying the ARDS sub-phenotypes based on physiological peculiarities (inspiratory effort, respiratory mechanics, and recruitability), thus allowing for the appropriate application of personalized supportive care. In this narrative review, we provide an overview of noninvasive and invasive respiratory support strategies, as well as discuss how identifying ARDS sub-phenotypes in daily practice can help clinicians to deliver personalized respiratory support and potentially improve patient outcomes.

New and personalized ventilatory strategies in patients with COVID-19

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus and may lead to severe respiratory failure and the need for mechanical ventilation (MV). At hospital admission, patients can present with severe hypoxemia and dyspnea requiring increasingly aggressive MV strategies according to the clinical severity: noninvasive respiratory support (NRS), MV, and the use of rescue strategies such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Among NRS strategies, new tools have been adopted for critically ill patients, with advantages and disadvantages that need to be further elucidated. Advances in the field of lung imaging have allowed better understanding of the disease, not only the pathophysiology of COVID-19 but also the consequences of ventilatory strategies. In cases of refractory hypoxemia, the use of ECMO has been advocated and knowledge on handling and how to personalize strategies have increased during the pandemic. The aims of the present review are to: (1) discuss the evidence on different devices and strategies under NRS; (2) discuss new and personalized management under MV based on the pathophysiology of COVID-19; and (3) contextualize the use of rescue strategies such as ECMO in critically ill patients with COVID-19.

Respective Effects of Helmet Pressure Support, Continuous Positive Airway Pressure, and Nasal High-Flow in Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: A Randomized Crossover Clinical Trial

Rationale: The respective effects of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and pressure support delivered through the helmet interface in patients with hypoxemia need to be better understood. Objectives: To assess the respective effects of helmet pressure support (noninvasive ventilation [NIV]) and continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) compared with high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) on effort to breathe, lung inflation, and gas exchange in patients with hypoxemia (PaO2/FiO2 ⩽ 200). Methods: Fifteen patients underwent 1-hour phases (constant FiO2) of HFNO (60 L/min), helmet NIV (PEEP = 14 cm H2O, pressure support = 12 cm H2O), and CPAP (PEEP = 14 cm H2O) in randomized sequence. Measurements and Main Results: Inspiratory esophageal (ΔPES) and transpulmonary pressure (ΔPL) swings were used as surrogates for inspiratory effort and lung distension, respectively. Tidal Volume (Vt) and end-expiratory lung volume were assessed with electrical impedance tomography. ΔPES was lower during NIV versus CPAP and HFNO (median [interquartile range], 5 [3-9] cm H2O vs. 13 [10-19] cm H2O vs. 10 [8-13] cm H2O; P = 0.001 and P = 0.01). ΔPL was not statistically different between treatments. PaO2/FiO2 ratio was significantly higher during NIV and CPAP versus HFNO (166 [136-215] and 175 [158-281] vs. 120 [107-149]; P = 0.002 and P = 0.001). NIV and CPAP similarly increased Vt versus HFNO (mean change, 70% [95% confidence interval (CI), 17-122%], P = 0.02; 93% [95% CI, 30-155%], P = 0.002) and end-expiratory lung volume (mean change, 198% [95% CI, 67-330%], P = 0.001; 263% [95% CI, 121-407%], P = 0.001), mostly due to increased aeration/ventilation in dorsal lung regions. During HFNO, 14 of 15 patients had pendelluft involving >10% of Vt; pendelluft was mitigated by CPAP and further by NIV. Conclusions: Compared with HFNO, helmet NIV, but not CPAP, reduced ΔPES. CPAP and NIV similarly increased oxygenation, end-expiratory lung volume, and Vt, without affecting ΔPL. NIV, and to a lesser extent CPAP, mitigated pendelluft. Clinical trial registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04241861).

Is COVID-19 different from other causes of acute respiratory distress syndrome?

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia can lead to acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. When mechanical ventilation is needed, almost all patients with COVID-19 pneumonia meet the criteria for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The question of the specificities of COVID-19-associated ARDS compared to other causes of ARDS is of utmost importance, as it may justify changes in ventilatory strategies. This review aims to describe the pathophysiology of COVID-19-associated ARDS and discusses whether specific ventilatory strategies are required in these patients.

Efficacy of almitrine as a rescue therapy for refractory hypoxemia in COVID and non-COVID acute respiratory distress syndrome. A retrospective monocenter study

BACKGROUND

Almitrine, a drug enhancing hypoxic pulmonary vasoconstriction, has been proposed as a rescue therapy for refractory hypoxemia in COVID related acute respiratory distress syndrome (C-ARDS). We aimed at investigating the response to almitrine depending on the cause of ARDS (COVID vs. non-COVID).

METHODS

Monocenter retrospective study from 2014 to 2021. All patients diagnosed with moderate to severe ARDS and treated with almitrine as rescue therapy for refractory hypoxemia were studied. Factor independently associated with oxygenation response to almitrine infusion were determined.

RESULTS

Sixty patients with ARDS and treated with almitrine were analyzed, 36 (60%) due to SARS-CoV-2 infection and 24 (40%) due to other causes. Baseline PaO2/FiO2 was 78 [61-101] mmHg, 76% had at least one prone positioning before the start of almitrine infusion. Median PaO2/FiO2 increased by +38 [7-142] mmHg (+61% [10-151]) after almitrine infusion. PaO2/FiO2 increased by +134 [12-186] mmHg in non-COVID ARDS (NC-ARDS) and by +19 [8-87] mmHg in C-ARDS. The increase in PaO2/FiO2 was lower in C-ARDS than in NC-ARDS (P=0.013). In multivariable analysis, C-ARDS, non-invasive ventilation and concomitant use of norepinephrine were independently associated with a decreased oxygenation response to almitrine infusion.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study reports a highly variable response to almitrine infusion in ARDS patients with refractory hypoxemia. Independent factors associated with a reduced oxygenation response to almitrine infusion were: COVID ARDS, concomitant use of norepinephrine, and non-invasive ventilatory strategy.

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Pregnancy: Updates in Principles and Practice

Acute respiratory failure occurs in 0.05% to 0.3% of pregnancies and is precipitated by pulmonary and nonpulmonary insults. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is the rapid onset of hypoxemic respiratory failure associated with bilateral pulmonary opacities on chest imaging attributed to noncardiogenic pulmonary edema. The pathophysiological features of ARDS include hypoxemia, diminished lung volumes, and decreased lung compliance. While there is a paucity of data concerning ARDS in the pregnant individual, management principles do not vary significantly between pregnant and nonpregnant patients. The following review will discuss the diagnosis and management of the pregnant patient with ARDS.

Rethinking Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome after COVID-19: If a "Better" Definition Is the Answer, What Is the Question?

The definition of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has a somewhat controversial history, with some even questioning the need for the term "ARDS." This controversy has been amplified by the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic given the marked increase in the incidence of ARDS, the relatively new treatment modalities that do not fit neatly with the Berlin definition, and the difficulty of making the diagnosis in resource-limited settings. We propose that attempts to revise the definition of ARDS should apply the framework originally developed by psychologists and social scientists and used by other medical disciplines to generate and assess definitions of clinical syndromes that do not have gold standards. This framework is structured around measures of reliability, feasibility, and validity. Future revisions of the definition of ARDS should contain the purpose, the methodology, and the framework for empirically testing any proposed definition. Attempts to revise critical illness syndromes' definitions usually hope to make them "better"; our recommendation is that future attempts use the same criteria used by other fields in defining what "better" means.

Helmet noninvasive support for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: rationale, mechanism of action and bedside application

Introduction

Helmet noninvasive support may provide advantages over other noninvasive oxygenation strategies in the management of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. In this narrative review based on a systematic search of the literature, we summarize the rationale, mechanism of action and technicalities for helmet support in hypoxemic patients.

Main results

In hypoxemic patients, helmet can facilitate noninvasive application of continuous positive-airway pressure or pressure-support ventilation via a hood interface that seals at the neck and is secured by straps under the arms. Helmet use requires specific settings. Continuous positive-airway pressure is delivered through a high-flow generator or a Venturi system connected to the inspiratory port of the interface, and a positive end-expiratory pressure valve place at the expiratory port of the helmet;  alternatively, pressure-support ventilation is delivered by connecting the helmet to a mechanical ventilator through a bi-tube circuit. The helmet interface allows continuous treatments with high positive end-expiratory pressure with good patient comfort. Preliminary data suggest that helmet noninvasive ventilation (NIV) may provide physiological benefits compared to other noninvasive oxygenation strategies (conventional oxygen, facemask NIV, high-flow nasal oxygen) in non-hypercapnic patients with moderate-to-severe hypoxemia (PaO₂/FiO₂ ≤ 200 mmHg), possibly because higher positive end-expiratory pressure (10–15 cmH₂O) can be applied for prolonged periods with good tolerability. This improves oxygenation, limits ventilator inhomogeneities, and may attenuate the potential harm of lung and diaphragm injury caused by vigorous inspiratory effort. The potential superiority of helmet support for reducing the risk of intubation has been hypothesized in small, pilot randomized trials and in a network metanalysis.

Conclusions

Helmet noninvasive support represents a promising tool for the initial management of patients with severe hypoxemic respiratory failure. Currently, the lack of confidence with this and technique and the absence of conclusive data regarding its efficacy render helmet use limited to specific settings, with expert and trained personnel. As per other noninvasive oxygenation strategies, careful clinical and physiological monitoring during the treatment is essential to early identify treatment failure and avoid delays in intubation.

Acute respiratory distress syndrome in adults: diagnosis, outcomes, long-term sequelae, and management

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is characterised by acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure with bilateral infiltrates on chest imaging, which is not fully explained by cardiac failure or fluid overload. ARDS is defined by the Berlin criteria. In this Series paper the diagnosis, management, outcomes, and long-term sequelae of ARDS are reviewed. Potential limitations of the ARDS definition and evidence that could inform future revisions are considered. Guideline recommendations, evidence, and uncertainties in relation to ARDS management are discussed. The future of ARDS strives towards a precision medicine approach, and the framework of treatable traits in ARDS diagnosis and management is explored.

Opportunities for improved clinical trial designs in acute respiratory distress syndrome

The acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a common critical illness syndrome with high morbidity and mortality. There are no proven pharmacological therapies for ARDS. The current definition of ARDS is based on shared clinical characteristics but does not capture the heterogeneity in clinical risk factors, imaging characteristics, physiology, timing of onset and trajectory, and biology of the syndrome. There is increasing interest within the ARDS clinical trialist community to design clinical trials that reduce heterogeneity in the trial population. This effort must be balanced with ongoing work to craft an inclusive, global definition of ARDS, with important implications for trial design. Ultimately, the two aims-to design trials that are applicable to the diverse global ARDS population while also advancing opportunities to identify targetable traits-should coexist. In this Personal View, we recommend two primary strategies to improve future ARDS trials: the development of new methods to target treatable traits in clinical trial populations, and improvements in the representativeness of ARDS trials, with the inclusion of global populations. We emphasise that these two strategies are complementary. We also discuss how a proposed expansion of the definition of ARDS could affect the future of clinical trials.

An expanded definition of acute respiratory distress syndrome: Challenging the status quo

Although the Berlin definition of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), 2012 has been widely used in clinical practice, issues have occasionally been raised regarding various criteria since it was proposed. High-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) is widely used for effective respiratory support in acute respiratory failure. As patients who do not require ventilation but meet the Berlin criteria have similar characteristics to those with ARDS, the definition of ARDS may be broadened to include patients receiving HFNO. As the PaO₂/FiO₂ under-recognizes the diagnosis of ARDS, a SpO₂/FiO₂ value of ≤315 may be considered instead of a PaO₂/FiO₂ value of ≤300 for diagnosing the condition in resource-constrained settings. In this context, patients with severe COVID-19 always meet other criteria for ARDS except for 7-day acute onset. Therefore, the timeframe for the onset of ARDS may be extended to up to 14 days. An expanded definition of ARDS may allow early identification of patients with less severe diseases and facilitate testing and application of new therapies in patients with a high risk of poor outcomes. Here, we discuss the major controversies regarding the extension of the ARDS definition with a view to improving clinical implementation and patient outcomes.

Limitations of the ARDS criteria during high-flow oxygen or non-invasive ventilation: evidence from critically ill COVID-19 patients

BACKGROUND

The ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen to inspired oxygen fraction (PaO₂/F_IO₂) during invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) is used as criteria to grade the severity of respiratory failure in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). During the SARS-CoV2 pandemic, the use of PaO₂/F_IO₂ ratio has been increasingly used in non-invasive respiratory support such as high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and non-invasive ventilation (NIV). The grading of hypoxemia in non-invasively ventilated patients is uncertain. The main hypothesis, investigated in this study, was that the PaO₂/F_IO₂ ratio does not change when switching between MV, NIV and HFNC.

METHODS

We investigated respiratory function in critically ill patients with COVID-19 included in a single-center prospective observational study of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) at Uppsala University Hospital in Sweden. In a steady state condition, the PaO₂/F_IO₂ ratio was recorded before and after any change between two of the studied respiratory support techniques (i.e., HFNC, NIV and MV).

RESULTS

A total of 148 patients were included in the present analysis. We find that any change in respiratory support from or to HFNC caused a significant change in PaO₂/F_IO₂ ratio. Changes in respiratory support between NIV and MV did not show consistent change in PaO₂/F_IO₂ ratio. In patients classified as mild to moderate ARDS during MV, the change from HFNC to MV showed a variable increase in PaO₂/F_IO₂ ratio ranging between 52 and 140 mmHg (median of 127 mmHg). This made prediction of ARDS severity during MV from the apparent ARDS grade during HFNC impossible.

CONCLUSIONS

HFNC is associated with lower PaO₂/F_IO₂ ratio than either NIV or MV in the same patient, while NIV and MV provided similar PaO₂/F_IO₂ and thus ARDS grade by Berlin definition. The large variation of PaO₂/F_IO₂ ratio indicates that great caution should be used when estimating ARDS grade as a measure of pulmonary damage during HFNC.

Comparison between high-flow nasal cannula and noninvasive ventilation in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) are important treatment approaches for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. However, the differential impact of HFNC versus NIV on clinical outcomes of COVID-19 is uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

We assessed the effects of HFNC versus NIV (interface or mode) on clinical outcomes of COVID-19.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, MedRxiv, and BioRxiv for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies (with a control group) of HFNC and NIV in patients with COVID-19-related AHRF published in English before February 2022. The primary outcome of interest was the mortality rate, and the secondary outcomes were intubation rate, PaO2/FiO2, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, and days free from invasive mechanical ventilation [ventilator-free day (VFD)].

RESULTS

In all, 23 studies fulfilled the selection criteria, and 5354 patients were included. The mortality rate was higher in the NIV group than the HFNC group [odds ratio (OR) = 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.51-0.84, p = 0.0008, I2 = 60%]; however, in this subgroup, no significant difference in mortality was observed in the NIV-helmet group (OR = 1.21, 95% CI: 0.63-2.32, p = 0.57, I2 = 0%) or NIV-continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) group (OR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.51-1.17, p = 0.23, I2 = 65%) relative to the HFNC group. There were no differences in intubation rate, PaO2/FiO2, ICU LOS, hospital LOS, or days free from invasive mechanical ventilation (VFD) between the HFNC and NIV groups.

CONCLUSION

Although mortality was lower with HFNC than NIV, there was no difference in mortality between HFNC and NIV on a subgroup of helmet or CPAP group. Future large sample RCTs are necessary to prove our findings.

REGISTRATION

This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (no. CRD42022321997).