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

Lung and Diaphragm Protection During Mechanical Ventilation in Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome often require mechanical ventilation to maintain adequate gas exchange and to reduce the workload of the respiratory muscles. Although lifesaving, positive pressure mechanical ventilation can potentially injure the lungs and diaphragm, further worsening patient outcomes. While the effect of mechanical ventilation on the risk of developing lung injury is widely appreciated, its potentially deleterious effects on the diaphragm have only recently come to be considered by the broader intensive care unit community. Importantly, both ventilator-induced lung injury and ventilator-induced diaphragm dysfunction are associated with worse patient-centered outcomes.

Association Between Tidal Volume in Invasive Mechanical Ventilation and Mortality in Children With Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation

Mechanical ventilation (MV) strategies in children on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) have not been studied much and the ventilatory parameters to avoid greater lung damage are still unclear. Our objective was to determine the relationship between conventional tidal volume (4-8 ml/kg, CTV) versus low tidal volume (<4 ml/kg, LTV) and mortality in children with MV at the beginning of ECMO. This was a retrospective cohort study that included 101 (10.9 months interquartile range [IQR]: 6.0-24.0) children. Children with LTV had greater odds of hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.45; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05-5.71; p = 0.03) regardless of age, reason for ECMO, and disease severity, as well as a longer duration of MV after ECMO. We found no differences between the groups in other MV settings. The CTV group required fewer fibrobronchoscopies than patients with LTV (aOR: 0.38; 95% CI: 0.15-0.99; p = 0.04). We found that a tidal volume (VT) lower than 4 ml/kg at the onset of ECMO support in children with MV was associated with higher odds of mortality, longer post-decannulation ventilation, and a greater need for fibrobronchoscopies. Lung-protective bundles in patients with ECMO and MV should consider the VT to maintain plateau and driving pressure that avoid major lung injury caused by MV.

Association between mechanical ventilation parameters and mortality in children with respiratory failure on ECMO: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

In refractory respiratory failure (RF), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a salvage therapy that seeks to reduce lung injury induced by mechanical ventilation. The parameters of optimal mechanical ventilation in children during ECMO are not known. Pulmonary ventilatory management during this therapy may impact mortality. The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between ventilatory parameters in children during ECMO therapy and in-hospital mortality.

Methods

A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Google Scholar from January 2013 until May 2022 (PROSPERO 450744), including studies in children with ECMO-supported RF assessing mechanical ventilation parameters, was conducted. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale; heterogeneity, with absence <25% and high >75%, was assessed using I2. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses using the Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model were performed to explore the impact of methodological quality on effect size.

Results

Six studies were included. The median age was 3.4 years (IQR: 3.2-4.2). Survival in the 28-day studies was 69%. Mechanical ventilation parameters associated with higher mortality were a very low tidal volume ventilation (<4 ml/kg; OR: 4.70; 95% CI: 2.91-7.59; p < 0.01; I2: 38%), high plateau pressure (mean Dif: -0.70 95% CI: -0.18, -0.22; p < 0.01), and high driving pressure (mean Dif: -0.96 95% CI: -1.83, -0.09: p = 0.03). The inspired fraction of oxygen (p = 0.09) and end-expiratory pressure (p = 0.69) were not associated with higher mortality. Patients who survived had less multiple organ failure (p < 0.01).

Conclusion

The mechanical ventilation variables associated with higher mortality in children with ECMO-supported respiratory failure are high plateau pressures, high driving pressure and very low tidal volume ventilation. No association between mortality and other parameters of the mechanical ventilator, such as the inspired fraction of oxygen or end-expiratory pressure, was found.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42023450744, PROSPERO 2023 (CRD42023450744).

Functional recovery in a cohort of ECMO and non-ECMO acute respiratory distress syndrome survivors

BACKGROUND

The mortality benefit of VV-ECMO in ARDS has been extensively studied, but the impact on long-term functional outcomes of survivors is poorly defined. We aimed to assess the association between ECMO and functional outcomes in a contemporaneous cohort of survivors of ARDS.

METHODS

Multicenter retrospective cohort study of ARDS survivors who presented to follow-up clinic. The primary outcome was FVC% predicted. Univariate and multivariate regression models were used to evaluate the impact of ECMO on the primary outcome.

RESULTS

This study enrolled 110 survivors of ARDS, 34 of whom were managed using ECMO. The ECMO cohort was younger (35 [28, 50] vs. 51 [44, 61] years old, p < 0.01), less likely to have COVID-19 (58% vs. 96%, p < 0.01), more severely ill based on the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (7 [5, 9] vs. 4 [3, 6], p < 0.01), dynamic lung compliance (15 mL/cmH20 [11, 20] vs. 27 mL/cmH20 [23, 35], p < 0.01), oxygenation index (26 [22, 33] vs. 9 [6, 11], p < 0.01), and their need for rescue modes of ventilation. ECMO patients had significantly longer lengths of hospitalization (46 [27, 62] vs. 16 [12, 31] days, p < 0.01) ICU stay (29 [19, 43] vs. 10 [5, 17] days, p < 0.01), and duration of mechanical ventilation (24 [14, 42] vs. 10 [7, 17] days, p < 0.01). Functional outcomes were similar in ECMO and non-ECMO patients. ECMO did not predict changes in lung function when adjusting for age, SOFA, COVID-19 status, or length of hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences in the FVC% predicted, or other markers of pulmonary, neurocognitive, or psychiatric functional recovery outcomes, when comparing a contemporaneous clinic-based cohort of survivors of ARDS managed with ECMO to those without ECMO.

Effects of adding the second drainage cannula in severely hypoxemic patients supported with VV ECMO due to COVID-19-associated ARDS

BACKGROUND

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a recognized method of support in patients with severe and refractory acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection. While veno-venous (VV) ECMO is the most common type, some patients with severe hypoxemia may require modifications to the ECMO circuit. In this study, we aimed to investigate the effects of adding a second drainage cannula to the circuit in patients with refractory hypoxemia, on their gas exchange, mechanical ventilation, ECMO settings, and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted an observational retrospective study based on a single-center institutional registry including all consecutive cases of COVID-19 patients requiring ECMO admitted to the Centre of Extracorporeal Therapies in Warsaw between March 1, 2020 and March 1, 2022. We selected patients who had an additional drainage cannula inserted. Changes in ECMO and ventilator settings, blood oxygenation, and hemodynamic parameters, as well as clinical outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Of 138 VV ECMO patients, 12 (9%) patients met the inclusion criteria. Ten patients (83%) were men, and mean age was 42.2 ± 6.8. An addition of drainage cannula resulted in a significant raise in ECMO blood flow (4.77 ± 0.44 to 5.94 ± 0.81 [L/min]; p = 0.001), and the ratio of ECMO blood flow to ECMO pump rotations per minute (RPM), whereas the raise in ECMO RPM alone was not statistically significant (3432 ± 258 to 3673 ± 340 [1/min]; p = 0.064). We observed a significant drop in ventilator FiO2 and a raise in PaO2 to FiO2 ratio, while blood lactates did not change significantly. Nine patients died in hospital, one was referred to lung transplantation center, two were discharged uneventfully.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of an additional drainage cannula in severe ARDS associated with COVID-19 allows for an increased ECMO blood flow and improved oxygenation. However, we observed no further improvement in lung-protective ventilation and poor survival.

Enhanced extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal by acidification and metabolic control

BACKGROUND

Extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO2R) promotes protective ventilation in patients with acute respiratory failure, but devices with high CO2 extraction capacity are required for clinically relevant impact. This study evaluates three novel low-flow techniques based on dialysate acidification, also combined with renal replacement therapy, and metabolic control.

METHODS

Eight swine were connected to a low-flow (350 mL/min) extracorporeal circuit including a dialyzer with a closed-loop dialysate circuit, and two membrane lungs on blood (MLb) and dialysate (MLd), respectively. The following 2-hour steps were performed: 1) MLb-start (MLb ventilated); 2) MLbd-start (MLb and MLd ventilated); 3) HLac (lactic acid infusion before MLd); 4) HCl-NaLac (hydrochloric acid infusion before MLd combined with renal replacement therapy and reinfusion of sodium lactate); 5) HCl-βHB-NaLac (hydrochloric acid infusion before MLd combined with renal replacement therapy and reinfusion of sodium lactate and sodium 3-hydroxybutyrate). Caloric and fluid inputs, temperature, blood glucose and arterial carbon dioxide pressure were kept constant.

RESULTS

The total MLs CO2 removal in HLac (130±25 mL/min), HCl-NaLac (130±21 mL/min) and HCl-βHB-NaLac (124±18 mL/min) were higher compared with MLbd-start (81±15 mL/min, P<0.05) and MLb-start (55±7 mL/min, P<0.05). Minute ventilation in HLac (4.3±0.9 L/min), HCl-NaLac (3.6±0.8 L/min) and HCl-βHB-NaLac (3.6±0.8 L/min) were lower compared to MLb-start (6.2±1.1 L/min, P<0.05) and MLbd-start (5.8±2.1 L/min, P<0.05). Arterial pH was 7.40±0.03 at MLb-start and decreased only during HCl-βHB-NaLac (7.35±0.03, P<0.05). No relevant changes in electrolyte concentrations, hemodynamics and significant adverse events were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

The three techniques achieved a significant extracorporeal CO2 removal allowing a relevant reduction in minute ventilation with a sufficient safety profile.

Retrospective analysis of factors associated with outcome in veno-venous extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation

BACKGROUND

The outcome of Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (VV-ECMO) in acute respiratory failure may be influenced by patient-related factors, center expertise and modalities of mechanical ventilation (MV) during ECMO. We determined, in a medium-size ECMO center in Switzerland, possible factors associated with mortality during VV-ECMO for acute respiratory failure of various etiologies.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all patients treated with VV-ECMO in our University Hospital from 2012 to 2019 (pre-COVID era). Demographic variables, severity scores, MV duration before ECMO, pre and on-ECMO arterial blood gases and respiratory variables were collected. The primary outcome was ICU mortality. Data were compared between survivors and non-survivors, and factors associated with mortality were assessed in univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients (33 ARDS, 18 non-ARDS) were included. ICU survival was 49% (ARDS, 39%; non-ARDS 67%). In univariate analyses, a higher driving pressure (DP) at 24h and 48h on ECMO (whole population), longer MV duration before ECMO and higher DP at 24h on ECMO (ARDS patients), were associated with mortality. In multivariate analyses, ECMO indication, higher DP at 24h on ECMO and, in ARDS, longer MV duration before ECMO, were independently associated with mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

DP on ECMO and longer MV duration before ECMO (in ARDS) are major, and potentially modifiable, factors influencing outcome during VV-ECMO.

A machine-learning approach to human ex vivo lung perfusion predicts transplantation outcomes and promotes organ utilization

Ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) is a data-intensive platform used for the assessment of isolated lungs outside the body for transplantation; however, the integration of artificial intelligence to rapidly interpret the large constellation of clinical data generated during ex vivo assessment remains an unmet need. We developed a machine-learning model, termed InsighTx, to predict post-transplant outcomes using n = 725 EVLP cases. InsighTx model AUROC (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) was 79 ± 3%, 75 ± 4%, and 85 ± 3% in training and independent test datasets, respectively. Excellent performance was observed in predicting unsuitable lungs for transplantation (AUROC: 90 ± 4%) and transplants with good outcomes (AUROC: 80 ± 4%). In a retrospective and blinded implementation study by EVLP specialists at our institution, InsighTx increased the likelihood of transplanting suitable donor lungs [odds ratio=13; 95% CI:4-45] and decreased the likelihood of transplanting unsuitable donor lungs [odds ratio=0.4; 95%CI:0.16-0.98]. Herein, we provide strong rationale for the adoption of machine-learning algorithms to optimize EVLP assessments and show that InsighTx could potentially lead to a safe increase in transplantation rates.

Ultraprotective Ventilation via ECCO2R in Three Patients Presenting an Air Leak: Is ECCO2R Effective?

Extracorporeal CO₂ removal (ECCO2R) is a therapeutic approach that allows protective ventilation in acute respiratory failure by preventing hypercapnia and subsequent acidosis. The main indications for ECCO2R in acute respiratory failure are COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) exacerbation, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and other situations of asthmatics status. However, CO₂ removal procedure is not extended to those ARDS patients presenting an air leak. Here, we report three cases of air leaks in patients with an ARDS that were successfully treated using a new ECCO2R device. Case 1 is a polytrauma patient that developed pneumothorax during the hospital stay, case 2 is a patient with a post-surgical bronchial fistula after an Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy, and case 3 is a COVID-19 patient who developed a spontaneous pneumothorax after being hospitalized for a prolonged time. ECCO2R allowed for protective ventilation mitigating VILI (ventilation-induced lung injury) and significantly improved hypercapnia and respiratory acidemia, allowing time for the native lung to heal. Although further investigation is needed, our observations seem to suggest that CO₂ removal can be a safe and effective procedure in patients connected to mechanical ventilation with ARDS-associated air leaks.

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.)

First non-invasive magnetic phrenic nerve and diaphragm stimulation in anaesthetized patients: a proof-of-concept study

BACKGROUND

Mechanical ventilation has side effects such as ventilator-induced diaphragm dysfunction, resulting in prolonged intensive care unit length of stays. Artificially evoked diaphragmatic muscle contraction may potentially maintain diaphragmatic muscle function and thereby ameliorate or counteract ventilator-induced diaphragm dysfunction. We hypothesized that bilateral non-invasive electromagnetic phrenic nerve stimulation (NEPNS) results in adequate diaphragm contractions and consecutively in effective tidal volumes.

RESULTS

This single-centre proof-of-concept study was performed in five patients who were 30 [IQR 21-33] years old, 60% (n = 3) females and undergoing elective surgery with general anaesthesia. Following anaesthesia and reversal of muscle relaxation, patients received bilateral NEPNS with different magnetic field intensities (10%, 20%, 30%, 40%); the stimulation was performed bilaterally with dual coils (connected to one standard clinical magnetic stimulator), specifically designed for bilateral non-invasive electromagnetic nerve stimulation. The stimulator with a maximal output of 2400 Volt, 160 Joule, pulse length 160 µs at 100% intensity was limited to 50% intensity, i.e. each single coil had a maximal output of 0.55 Tesla and 1200 Volt. There was a linear relationship between dosage (magnetic field intensity) and effect (tidal volume, primary endpoint, p < 0.001). Mean tidal volume was 0.00, 1.81 ± 0.99, 4.55 ± 2.23 and 7.43 ± 3.06 ml/kg ideal body weight applying 10%, 20%, 30% and 40% stimulation intensity, respectively. Mean time to find an initial adequate stimulation point was 89 (range 15-441) seconds.

CONCLUSIONS

Bilateral non-invasive electromagnetic phrenic nerve stimulation generated a tidal volume of 3-6 ml/kg ideal body weight due to diaphragmatic contraction in lung-healthy anaesthetized patients. Further perspectives in critically ill patients should include assessment of clinical outcomes to confirm whether diaphragm contraction through non-invasive electromagnetic phrenic nerve stimulation potentially ameliorates or prevents diaphragm atrophy.

Very Low Driving-Pressure Ventilation in Patients With COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Physiologic Study

OBJECTIVES

To determine in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) on venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) whether reducing driving pressure (ΔP) would decrease plasma biomarkers of inflammation and lung injury (interleukin-6 [IL-6], IL-8, and the soluble receptor for advanced glycation end-products sRAGE).

DESIGN

A single-center prospective physiologic study.

SETTING

At a single university medical center.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult patients with severe COVID-19 ARDS on VV ECMO.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants on VV ECMO had the following biomarkers measured: (1) pre-ECMO with low-tidal-volume ventilation (LTVV), (2) post-ECMO with LTVV, (3) during low-driving-pressure ventilation (LDPV), (4) after 2 hours of very low driving-pressure ventilation (V-LDPV, main intervention ΔP = 1 cmH2O), and (5) 2 hours after returning to LDPV.

MAIN MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

Twenty-six participants were enrolled; 21 underwent V-LDPV. There was no significant change in IL-6, IL-8, and sRAGE from LDPV to V-LDPV and from V-LDPV to LDPV. Only participants (9 of 21) with nonspontaneous breaths had significant change (p < 0.001) in their tidal volumes (Vt) (mean ± SD), 1.9 ± 0.5, 0.1 ± 0.2, and 2.0 ± 0.7 mL/kg predicted body weight (PBW). Participants with spontaneous breathing, Vt were unchanged-4.5 ± 3.1, 4.7 ± 3.1, and 5.6 ± 2.9 mL/kg PBW (p = 0.481 and p = 0.065, respectively). There was no relationship found when accounting for Vt changes and biomarkers.

CONCLUSIONS

Biomarkers did not significantly change with decreased ΔPs or Vt changes during the first 24 hours post-ECMO. Despite deep sedation, reductions in Vt during V-LDPV were not reliably achieved due to spontaneous breaths. Thus, patients on VV ECMO for ARDS may have higher Vt (ie, transpulmonary pressure) than desired despite low ΔPs or Vt.

Timing of Prone Positioning During Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

OBJECTIVES

To assess the association of timing to prone positioning (PP) during venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) with the probability of being discharged alive from the ICU at 90 days (primary endpoint) and the improvement of the respiratory system compliance (Cpl,rs).

DESIGN

Pooled individual data analysis from five original observational cohort studies.

SETTING

European extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) centers.

PATIENTS

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients who underwent PP during ECMO.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Time to PP during V-V ECMO was explored both as a continuous and a categorical variable with Cox proportional hazard models. Three hundred patients were included in the analysis. The longer the time to PP during V-V ECMO, the lower the adjusted probability of alive ICU discharge (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.90 for each day increase; 95% CI, 0.87-0.93). Two hundred twenty-three and 77 patients were included in the early PP (≤ 5 d) and late PP (> 5 d) groups, respectively. The cumulative 90-day probability of being discharged alive from the ICU was 61% in the early PP group vs 36% in the late PP group (log-rank test, p <0.001). This benefit was maintained after adjustment for confounders (adjusted HR, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.66-3.81; p <0.001). In the early PP group, PP was associated with a significant improvement of Cpl,rs (4 ± 9 mL/cm H2O vs 0 ± 12 in the late PP group, p=0.038).

CONCLUSIONS

In a large cohort of ARDS patients on ECMO, early PP during ECMO was associated with a higher probability of being discharged alive from the ICU at 90 days and a greater improvement of Cpl,rs.

Ultra-lung-protective ventilation and biotrauma in severe ARDS patients on veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Ultra-lung-protective ventilation may be useful during veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (vv-ECMO) for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) to minimize ventilator-induced lung injury and to facilitate lung recovery. The objective was to compare pulmonary and systemic biotrauma evaluated by numerous biomarkers of inflammation, epithelial, endothelial injuries, and lung repair according to two ventilator strategies on vv-ECMO.

METHODS

This is a prospective randomized controlled study. Patients were randomized to receive during 48 h either ultra-lung-protective ventilation combining very low tidal volume (1-2 mL/kg of predicted body weight), low respiratory rate (5-10 cycles per minute), positive expiratory transpulmonary pressure, and 16 h of prone position or lung-protective-ventilation which followed the ECMO arm of the EOLIA trial (control group).

RESULTS

The primary outcome was the alveolar concentrations of interleukin-1-beta, interleukin-6, interleukin-8, surfactant protein D, and blood concentrations of serum advanced glycation end products and angiopoietin-2 48 h after randomization. Enrollment was stopped for futility after the inclusion of 39 patients. Tidal volume, respiratory rate, minute ventilation, plateau pressure, and mechanical power were significantly lower in the ultra-lung-protective group. None of the concentrations of the pre-specified biomarkers differed between the two groups 48 h after randomization. However, a trend to higher 60-day mortality was observed in the ultra-lung-protective group compared to the control group (45 vs 17%, p = 0.06).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a significant reduction in the mechanical power, ultra-lung-protective ventilation during 48 h did not reduce biotrauma in patients with vv-ECMO-supported ARDS. The impact of this ventilation strategy on clinical outcomes warrants further investigation. Trial registration Clinical trial registered with www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov ( NCT03918603 ). Registered 17 April 2019.

Extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal for acute respiratory failure: a review of potential indications, clinical practice and open research questions

Extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO₂R) is a form of extracorporeal life support (ECLS) largely aimed at removing carbon dioxide in patients with acute hypoxemic or acute hypercapnic respiratory failure, so as to minimize respiratory acidosis, allowing more lung protective ventilatory settings which should decrease ventilator-induced lung injury. ECCO₂R is increasingly being used despite the lack of high-quality evidence, while complications associated with the technique remain an issue of concern. This review explains the physiological basis underlying the use of ECCO₂R, reviews the evidence regarding indications and contraindications, patient management and complications, and addresses organizational and ethical considerations. The indications and the risk-to-benefit ratio of this technique should now be carefully evaluated using structured national or international registries and large randomized trials.

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

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

Invasive mechanical ventilation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome receiving extracorporeal support: a narrative review of strategies to mitigate lung injury

Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is indicated in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome and severely impaired gas exchange despite evidence-based lung protective ventilation, prone positioning and other parts of the standard algorithm for treating such patients. Extracorporeal support can facilitate ultra-lung-protective ventilation, meaning even lower volumes and pressures than standard lung-protective ventilation, by directly removing carbon dioxide in patients needing injurious ventilator settings to maintain sufficient gas exchange. Injurious ventilation results in ventilator-induced lung injury, which is one of the main determinants of mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome. Marked reductions in the intensity of ventilation to the lowest tolerable levels under extracorporeal support may be achieved and could thereby potentially mitigate ventilator-induced lung injury and theoretically patient self-inflicted lung injury in spontaneously breathing patients with high respiratory drive. However, the benefits of this strategy may be counterbalanced by the use of continuous deep sedation and even neuromuscular blocking drugs, which may impair physical rehabilitation and impact long-term outcomes. There are currently a lack of large-scale prospective data to inform optimal invasive ventilation practices and how to best apply a holistic approach to patients receiving veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, while minimising ventilator-induced and patient self-inflicted lung injury. We aimed to review the literature relating to invasive ventilation strategies in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome receiving extracorporeal support and discuss personalised ventilation approaches and the potential role of adjunctive therapies in facilitating lung protection.

Attributable Mortality of Ventilator-associated Pneumonia Among Patients with COVID-19

Rationale: Patients with a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection are at higher risk of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and may have an increased attributable mortality (increased or decreased risk of death if VAP occurs in a patient) and attributable fraction (proportion of deaths that are attributable to an exposure) of VAP-related mortality compared with subjects without coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Objectives: Estimation of the attributable mortality of the VAP among patients with COVID-19. Methods: Using the REA-REZO surveillance network, three groups of adult medical ICU patients were computed: control group (patients admitted between 2016 and 2019; prepandemic patients), pandemic COVID-19 group (PandeCOV⁺), and pandemic non-COVID-19 group (PandeCOV^-) admitted during 2020. The primary outcome was the estimation of attributable mortality and attributable fraction related to VAP in these patients. Using multistate modeling with causal inference, the outcomes related to VAP were also evaluated. Measurements and Main Results: A total of 64,816 patients were included in the control group, 7,442 in the PandeCOV^- group, and 1,687 in the PandeCOV⁺ group. The incidence of VAP was 14.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.9 to 14.6), 18.3 (95% CI, 17.3 to 19.4), and 31.9 (95% CI, 29.8 to 34.2) per 1,000 ventilation-days in each group, respectively. Attributable mortality at 90 days was 3.15% (95%, CI, 2.04% to 3.43%), 2.91% (95% CI, -0.21% to 5.02%), and 8.13% (95% CI, 3.54% to 12.24%), and attributable fraction of mortality at 90 days was 1.22% (95% CI, 0.83 to 1.63), 1.42% (95% CI, -0.11% to 2.61%), and 9.17% (95% CI, 3.54% to 12.24%) for the control, PandeCOV^-, and PandeCOV⁺ groups, respectively. Except for the higher risk of developing VAP, the PandeCOV^- group shared similar VAP characteristics with the control group. PandeCOV⁺ patients were at lower risk of death without VAP (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.74) than the control group. Conclusions: VAP-attributable mortality was higher for patients with COVID-19, with more than 9% of the overall mortality related to VAP.