Clinical and Economic Impact of Formulary Conversion From Inhaled Flolan to Inhaled Veletri for Refractory Hypoxemia in Critically Ill Patients

A Narrative Review on the Administration of Inhaled Prostaglandins in Critically Ill Adult Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

OBJECTIVE

To describe the effect of inhaled prostaglandins on both oxygenation and mortality in critically ill patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), with a focus on safety and efficacy in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated ARDS and non-COVID-19 ARDS.

DATA SOURCES

A literature search of MEDLINE was performed using the following search terms: inhaled prostaglandins, inhaled epoprostenol, inhaled nitric oxide, ARDS, critically ill. All abstracts were reviewed.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Relevant English-language reports and studies conducted in humans between 1980 and June 2023 were considered.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Data regarding inhaled prostaglandins and their effect on oxygenation are limited but show a benefit in patients who respond to therapy, and data pertaining to their effect on mortality is scarce. Concerns exist regarding the formulation of inhaled epoprostenol (iEPO) utilized in addition to modes of medication delivery; however, the limited data surrounding their use have shown a reasonable safety profile. Other avenues and beneficial effects may exist with inhaled prostaglandins, such as use in COVID-19-associated ARDS or non-COVID-19 ARDS patients undergoing noninvasive mechanical ventilation or during patient transport.

RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE

The use of inhaled prostaglandins can be considered in critically ill patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS or non-COVID-19 ARDS who are experiencing difficulties with oxygenation refractory to nonpharmacologic strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of iEPO and other inhaled prostaglandins requires further investigation to fully elucidate their effects on clinical outcomes, but it appears these medications may have a potential benefit in COVID-19-associated ARDS and non-COVID-19 ARDS patients with refractory hypoxemia but with little effect on mortality.

Inhaled Prostacyclins for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Studies evaluating inhaled prostacyclins for the management of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) have produced inconsistent results regarding their effect on oxygenation. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the change in the Pao₂/Fio₂ ratio after administration of an inhaled prostacyclin in patients with ARDS.

DATA SOURCES

We searched Ovid Medline, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science.

STUDY SELECTION

We included abstracts and trials evaluating administration of inhaled prostacyclins in patients with ARDS.

DATA EXTRACTION

Change in the Pao₂/Fio₂ ratio, Pao₂, and mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) were extracted from included studies. Evidence certainty and risk of bias were evaluated using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We included 23 studies (1,658 patients) from 6,339 abstracts identified by our search strategy. The use of inhaled prostacyclins improved oxygenation by increasing the Pao₂/Fio₂ ratio from baseline (mean difference [MD], 40.35; 95% CI, 26.14-54.56; p < 0.00001; I² = 95%; very low quality evidence). Of the eight studies to evaluate change in Pao₂, inhaled prostacyclins also increased Pao₂ from baseline (MD, 12.68; 95% CI, 2.89-22.48 mm Hg; p = 0.01; I² = 96%; very low quality evidence). Only three studies evaluated change in mPAP, but inhaled prostacyclins were found to improve mPAP from baseline (MD, -3.67; 95% CI, -5.04 to -2.31 mm Hg; p < 0.00001; I² = 68%; very low quality evidence).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with ARDS, use of inhaled prostacyclins improves oxygenation and reduces pulmonary artery pressures. Overall data are limited and there was high risk of bias and heterogeneity among included studies. Future studies evaluating inhaled prostacyclins for ARDS should evaluate their role in ARDS subphenotypes, including cardiopulmonary ARDS.

Postoperative Respiratory Failure and Advanced Ventilator Settings

Postoperative respiratory failure has a multifactorial etiology, of which atelectasis is the most common mechanism. Its injurious effects are magnified by surgical inflammation, high driving pressures, and postoperative pain. Chest physiotherapy and noninvasive ventilation are good options to prevent progression of respiratory failure. Acute respiratory disease syndrome is a late and severe finding, which is associated with high morbidity and mortality. If present, proning is a safe, effective, and underutilized therapy. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is an option only when traditional supportive measures have failed.

Inhaled Pulmonary Vasodilator Therapy in Adult Lung Transplant: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) is commonly administered for selectively inhaled pulmonary vasodilation and prevention of oxidative injury after lung transplant (LT). Inhaled epoprostenol (iEPO) has been introduced worldwide as a cost-saving alternative to iNO without high-grade evidence for this indication.

Objective

To investigate whether the use of iEPO will lead to similar rates of severe/grade 3 primary graft dysfunction (PGD-3) after adult LT when compared with use of iNO.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This health system-funded, randomized, blinded (to participants, clinicians, data managers, and the statistician), parallel-designed, equivalence clinical trial included 201 adult patients who underwent single or bilateral LT between May 30, 2017, and March 21, 2020. Patients were grouped into 5 strata according to key prognostic clinical features and randomized per stratum to receive either iNO or iEPO at the time of LT via 1:1 treatment allocation.

Interventions

Treatment with iNO or iEPO initiated in the operating room before lung allograft reperfusion and administered continously until cessation criteria met in the intensive care unit (ICU).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was PGD-3 development at 24, 48, or 72 hours after LT. The primary analysis was for equivalence using a two one-sided test (TOST) procedure (90% CI) with a margin of 19% for between-group PGD-3 risk difference. Secondary outcomes included duration of mechanical ventilation, hospital and ICU lengths of stay, incidence and severity of acute kidney injury, postoperative tracheostomy placement, and in-hospital, 30-day, and 90-day mortality rates. An intention-to-treat analysis was performed for the primary and secondary outcomes, supplemented by per-protocol analysis for the primary outcome.

Results

A total of 201 randomized patients met eligibility criteria at the time of LT (129 men [64.2%]). In the intention-to-treat population, 103 patients received iEPO and 98 received iNO. The primary outcome occurred in 46 of 103 patients (44.7%) in the iEPO group and 39 of 98 (39.8%) in the iNO group, leading to a risk difference of 4.9% (TOST 90% CI, -6.4% to 16.2%; P = .02 for equivalence). There were no significant between-group differences for secondary outcomes.

Conclusions and Relevance

Among patients undergoing LT, use of iEPO was associated with similar risks for PGD-3 development and other postoperative outcomes compared with the use of iNO.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03081052.

Comparison of Fixed-Dose Inhaled Epoprostenol and Inhaled Nitric Oxide for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Critically Ill Adults

PURPOSE

Several reports have demonstrated similar effects on oxygenation between inhaled epoprostenol (iEPO) compared to inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Previous studies directly comparing oxygenation and clinical outcomes between iEPO and iNO exclusively in an adult ARDS patient population utilized a weight-based dosing strategy. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and economic impact between iNO and fixed-dosed iEPO for ARDS in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a major academic medical center between January 1, 2014, and October 31, 2018. Patients ≥18 years of age with moderate-to-severe ARDS were included. The primary end point was to compare the mean change in partial arterial oxygen pressure to fraction of inspired oxygen (Pao ₂: Fio ₂) at 4 hours from baseline between iEPO and iNO. Other secondary aims were total acquisition drug costs, in-hospital mortality, ICU and hospital length of stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation.

RESULTS

A total of 239 patients were included with 139 (58.2%) and 100 (41.8%) in the iEPO and iNO groups, respectively. The mean change in Pao ₂: Fio ₂ at 4 hours from baseline in the iEPO and iNO groups were 31.4 ± 54.6 and 32.4 ± 42.7 mm Hg, respectively (P = .88). The responder rate at 4 hours was similar between iEPO and iNO groups (64.7% and 66.0%, respectively, P = .84). Clinical outcomes including mortality, overall hospital and ICU length of stay, and mechanical ventilation duration were similar between iEPO and iNO groups. Estimated annual cost-savings realized with iEPO was USD1 074 433.

CONCLUSION

Fixed-dose iEPO was comparable to iNO in patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS for oxygenation and ventilation parameters as well as clinical outcomes. Significant cost-savings were realized with iEPO use.

Effectiveness, Safety, and Economic Comparison of Inhaled Epoprostenol Brands, Flolan and Veletri, in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Background: No previous studies exist examining 2 inhaled epoprostenol formulations in an acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patient population. Objective: The study aim was to evaluate a formulary conversion from inhaled Flolan to Veletri to determine the impact on effectiveness, safety, and cost in patients with ARDS. Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective, matched cohort observational study at a tertiary care academic medical center. Patients included were mechanically ventilated, adult patients with ARDS receiving inhaled Flolan or Veletri for ≥1 hour in the intensive care unit. Results: A total of 132 patients were included in the matched cohort. There was no difference detected in change in partial pressure of arterial O₂/fraction of inspired O₂ (PaO₂/FiO₂) ratio after 1 hour of therapy between the inhaled Flolan and Veletri groups (27.2 ± 46.2 vs 30 ± 68 mm Hg, P = 0.78). Significant differences in secondary outcomes included incidence of hypotension (83% vs 95.5%, P = 0.04) and thrombocytopenia (9.1% vs 29.5%, P < 0.01) in the inhaled Flolan and Veletri groups, respectively, with no difference in cost per duration of therapy (P = 0.29). Conclusions and Relevance: There was no difference in the change in PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio after 1 hour of therapy between inhaled Flolan and Veletri in an ARDS patient population. The formulary conversion from inhaled Flolan to Veletri was likely justified.

Management of Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension in the ICU

Patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) who are admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) pose a challenge to the multidisciplinary health-care team due to the complexity of the pathophysiology of their disease state and the medication considerations that must be made to appropriately manage them. PAH is a progressive disease with the majority of patients ultimately dying as a result of right ventricular (RV) failure. During an acute decompensation, patients must be appropriately managed to optimize volume status, RV function, cardiac output, and systemic perfusion, while treating the underlying cause of the exacerbation. During times of critical illness, the ability to administer medications approved for use in PAH can be impacted by end-organ damage, hemodynamic instability, new drug interactions, or available dosage forms. Balancing the multimodal treatment approach needed to manage an acute exacerbation and the pharmacokinetic and administration concerns impacting baseline PAH therapy as a result of critical illness requires an expert multiprofessional PAH team. The purpose of this review is to evaluate specific management considerations for critically ill patients with PAH in the ICU.

Moderate to Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Management Strategies: A Narrative Review

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remains a common complication associated with significant negative outcomes in critically ill patients. Lung-protective mechanical ventilation strategies remain the cornerstone in the management of ARDS. Several therapeutic options are currently available including fluid management, neuromuscular blocking agents, prone positioning, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, corticosteroids, and inhaled pulmonary vasodilating agents (prostacyclins and nitric oxide). Unfortunately, an evidence-based, standard-of-care approach in managing ARDS beyond lung-protective ventilation remains elusive, contributing to significant variability in clinical practice. Although the optimal therapeutic strategy for managing moderate to severe ARDS remains extremely controversial, therapies supported with more robust clinical evidence should be considered first. The purpose of this narrative review is to discuss the published clinical evidence for both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic management strategies in adult patients with moderate to severe ARDS as well as to discuss practical considerations for implementation.

Aerosolized prostacyclins for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS)

BACKGROUND

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a critical condition that is associated with high mortality and morbidity. Aerosolized prostacyclin has been used to improve oxygenation despite the limited evidence available so far.This review was originally published in 2010 and updated in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of aerosolized prostacyclin in adults and children with ARDS.

SEARCH METHODS

In this update, we searched CENTRAL (2017, Issue 4); MEDLINE (OvidSP), Embase (OvidSP), ISI BIOSIS Previews, ISI Web of Science, LILACS, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), and three trials registers. We handsearched the reference lists of the latest reviews, randomized and non-randomized trials, and editorials, and cross-checked them with our search of MEDLINE. We contacted the main authors of included studies to request any missed, unreported or ongoing studies. The search was run from inception to 5 May 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs), irrespective of publication status, date of publication, blinding status, outcomes published or language. We contacted trial investigators and study authors to retrieve relevant and missing data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three authors independently abstracted data and resolved any disagreements by discussion. Our primary outcome measure was all-cause mortality. We planned to perform subgroup and sensitivity analyses to assess the effect of aerosolized prostacyclin in adults and children, and on various clinical and physiological outcomes. We assessed the risk of bias through assessment of methodological trial components and the risk of random error through trial sequential analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included two RCTs with 81 participants.One RCT involved 14 critically ill children with ARDS (very low quality of evidence), and one RCT involved 67 critically ill adults (very low quality evidence).Only one RCT (paediatric trial) provided data on mortality and found no difference between intervention and control. However, this trial was eligible for meta-analysis due to a cross-over design.We assessed the benefits and harms of aerosolized prostacyclin. One RCT found no difference in improvement of partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood/fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO₂/FiO₂) ratio (mean difference (MD) -25.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) -60.48 to 9.78; P = 0.16; 67 participants, very low quality evidence).There were no adverse events such as bleeding or organ dysfunction in any of the included trials. Due to the limited number of RCTs, we were unable to perform the prespecified subgroup and sensitivity analyses or trial sequential analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are unable to tell from our results whether the intervention has an important effect on mortality because the results were too imprecise to rule out a small or no effect. Therefore, no current evidence supports or refutes the routine use of aerosolized prostacyclin for people with ARDS. There is an urgent need for more RCTs.

High-flow oxygen therapy and other inhaled therapies in intensive care units

In this Series paper, we review the current evidence for the use of high-flow oxygen therapy, inhaled gases, and aerosols in the care of critically ill patients. The available evidence supports the use of high-flow nasal cannulae for selected patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure. Heliox might prevent intubation or improve gas flow in mechanically ventilated patients with severe asthma. Additionally, it might improve the delivery of aerosolised bronchodilators in obstructive lung disease in general. Inhaled nitric oxide might improve outcomes in a subset of patients with postoperative pulmonary hypertension who had cardiac surgery; however, it has not been shown to provide long-term benefit in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Inhaled prostacyclins, similar to inhaled nitric oxide, are not recommended for routine use in patients with ARDS, but can be used to improve oxygenation in patients who are not adequately stabilised with traditional therapies. Aerosolised bronchodilators are useful in mechanically ventilated patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, but are not recommended for those with ARDS. Use of aerosolised antibiotics for ventilator-associated pneumonia and ventilator-associated tracheobronchitis shows promise, but the delivered dose can be highly variable if proper attention is not paid to the delivery method.