Improving lung compliance by external compression of the chest wall

The Respiratory Mechanics of COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome-Lessons Learned?

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a well-defined clinical entity characterized by the acute onset of diffuse pulmonary injury and hypoxemia not explained by fluid overload. The COVID-19 pandemic brought about an unprecedented volume of patients with ARDS and challenged our understanding and clinical approach to treatment of this clinical syndrome. Unique to COVID-19 ARDS is the disruption and dysregulation of the pulmonary vascular compartment caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which is a significant cause of hypoxemia in these patients. As a result, gas exchange does not necessarily correlate with respiratory system compliance and mechanics in COVID-19 ARDS as it does with other etiologies. The purpose of this review is to relate the mechanics of COVID-19 ARDS to its underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms and outline the lessons we have learned in the management of this clinic syndrome.

Phenotypes of esophageal pressure response to the change of positive end-expiratory pressure in patients with moderate acute respiratory distress syndrome

Background

Esophageal pressure (Pes) has been used as a surrogate of pleural pressure (Ppl) to titrate positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients. The relationship between Pes and PEEP remains undetermined.

Methods

A gastric tube with a balloon catheter was inserted to monitor Pes in moderate to severe ARDS patients who underwent invasive mechanical ventilation. To assess the end-expiratory Pes response (ΔPes) to PEEP changes (ΔPEEP), the PEEP level was decreased and increased subsequently (with an average change of 3 cmH2O). The patients underwent the following two series of PEEP adjustment: (I) from PEEP-3 cmH2O to PEEPbaseline; and (II) from PEEPbaseline to PEEP+3 cmH2O. The patients were classified as "PEEP-dependent type" if they had ΔPes ≥30% ΔPEEP and were otherwise classified as "PEEP-independent type" (ΔPes <30% ΔPEEP in any series).

Results

In total, 54 series of PEEP adjustments were performed in 18 ARDS patients. Of these patients, 12 were classified as PEEP-dependent type, and six were classified as PEEP-independent type. During the PEEP adjustment, end-expiratory Pes changed significantly in the PEEP-dependent patients, who had a Pes of 10.8 (7.9, 12.3), 12.5 (10.5, 14.9), and 14.5 (13.1, 18.3) cmH2O at PEEP-3 cmH2O, PEEPbaseline, and PEEP+3 cmH2O, respectively (median and quartiles; P<0.0001), while end-expiratory transpulmonary pressure (PL) was maintained at an optimal range [-0.1 (-0.7, 0.4), 0.1 (-0.6, 0.5), and 0.3 (-0.3, 0.7) cmH2O, respectively]. In the PEEP-independent patients, the Pes remained unchanged, with a Pes of 15.4 (11.4, 17.8), 15.5 (11.6, 17.8), and 15.4 (11.7, 18.30) cmH2O at each of the three PEEP levels, respectively. Meanwhile, end-expiratory PL significantly improved [from -5.5 (-8.5, -3.4) at PEEP-3 cmH2O to -2.5 (-5.0, -1.6) at PEEPbaseline to -0.5 (-1.8, 0.3) at PEEP+3 cmH2O; P<0.01].

Conclusions

Two types of Pes phenotypes were identified according to the ΔPes to ΔPEEP. The underlying mechanisms and implications for clinical practice require further exploration.

A framework for heart-lung interaction and its application to prone position in the acute respiratory distress syndrome

While both cardiac output (Qcirculatory) and right atrial pressure (PRA) are important measures in the intensive care unit (ICU), they are outputs of the system and not determinants. That is to say, in a model of the circulation wherein venous return and cardiac function find equilibrium at an 'operating point' (OP, defined by the PRA on the x-axis and Qcirculatory on the y-axis) both the PRA and Qcirculatory are, necessarily, dependent variables. A simplified geometrical approximation of Guyton's model is put forth to illustrate that the independent variables of the system are: 1) the mean systemic filling pressure (PMSF), 2) the pressure within the pericardium (PPC), 3) cardiac function and 4) the resistance to venous return. Classifying independent and dependent variables is clinically-important for therapeutic control of the circulation. Recent investigations in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) have illuminated how PMSF, cardiac function and the resistance to venous return change when placing a patient in prone. Moreover, the location of the OP at baseline and the intimate physiological link between the heart and the lungs also mediate how the PRA and Qcirculatory respond to prone position. Whereas turning a patient from supine to prone is the focus of this discussion, the principles described within the framework apply equally-well to other more common ICU interventions including, but not limited to, ventilator management, initiating vasoactive medications and providing intravenous fluids.

PEEP Titration Is Markedly Affected by Trunk Inclination in Mechanically Ventilated Patients with COVID-19 ARDS: A Physiologic, Cross-Over Study

BACKGROUND

Changing trunk inclination affects lung function in patients with ARDS. However, its impacts on PEEP titration remain unknown. The primary aim of this study was to assess, in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 ARDS, the effects of trunk inclination on PEEP titration. The secondary aim was to compare respiratory mechanics and gas exchange in the semi-recumbent (40° head-of-the-bed) and supine-flat (0°) positions following PEEP titration.

METHODS

Twelve patients were positioned both at 40° and 0° trunk inclination (randomized order). The PEEP associated with the best compromise between overdistension and collapse guided by Electrical Impedance Tomography (PEEPEIT) was set. After 30 min of controlled mechanical ventilation, data regarding respiratory mechanics, gas exchange, and EIT parameters were collected. The same procedure was repeated for the other trunk inclination.

RESULTS

PEEPEIT was lower in the semi-recumbent than in the supine-flat position (8 ± 2 vs. 13 ± 2 cmH2O, p < 0.001). A semi-recumbent position with optimized PEEP resulted in higher PaO2:FiO2 (141 ± 46 vs. 196 ± 99, p = 0.02) and a lower global inhomogeneity index (46 ± 10 vs. 53 ± 11, p = 0.008). After 30 min of observation, a loss of aeration (measured by EIT) was observed only in the supine-flat position (-153 ± 162 vs. 27 ± 203 mL, p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

A semi-recumbent position is associated with lower PEEPEIT and results in better oxygenation, less derecruitment, and more homogenous ventilation compared to the supine-flat position.

Minimally invasive surgery for anterior flail chest injury in the acute phase: series of 10 cases

OBJECTIVE

Anterior flail chest frequency represents a significant case of ventilator insufficiency. Surgical stabilization of acute phase of trauma is considered to effectively shorten the period of ventilation compared to conservative treatment using mechanical ventilation. We have applied minimally invasive surgery to stabilize the injured chest wall.

METHODS

Surgical stabilization of predominantly anterior flail chest segments was performed using one or two bars as per the Nuss procedure, during the acute phase of chest trauma. Data from all patients were examined.

RESULTS

Ten patients received surgical stabilization using the Nuss method between 1999 and 2021. All patients had already been mechanically ventilated prior to surgery. The mean period from trauma to surgery was 4.2 days (range, 1-8 days). The number of bars used was one for 7 patients, and two for 3 patients. The mean operation time was 60 min (range, 25-107 min). All patients were extubated from artificial respiration without surgical complications or mortality. Mean total ventilation period was 6.5 days (range, 2-15 days). All bars were removed in a subsequent surgery. No collapses or fracture recurrences were observed.

CONCLUSION

This method is simple and effective for fixed anterior dominant frail segment.

Prone position: how understanding and clinical application of a technique progress with time

Historical background

The prone position was first proposed on theoretical background in 1974 (more advantageous distribution of mechanical ventilation). The first clinical report on 5 ARDS patients in 1976 showed remarkable improvement of oxygenation after pronation. 

Pathophysiology

The findings in CT scans enhanced the use of prone position in ARDS patients. The main mechanism of the improved gas exchange seen in the prone position is nowadays attributed to a dorsal ventilatory recruitment, with a substantially unchanged distribution of perfusion. Regardless of the gas exchange, the primary effect of the prone position is a more homogenous distribution of ventilation, stress and strain, with similar size of pulmonary units in dorsal and ventral regions. In contrast, in the supine position the ventral regions are more expanded compared with the dorsal regions, which leads to greater ventral stress and strain, induced by mechanical ventilation.

Outcome in ARDS

The number of clinical studies paralleled the evolution of the pathophysiological understanding. The first two clinical trials in 2001 and 2004 were based on the hypothesis that better oxygenation would lead to a better survival and the studies were more focused on gas exchange than on lung mechanics. The equations better oxygenation = better survival was disproved by these and other larger trials (ARMA trial). However, the first studies provided signals that some survival advantages were possible in a more severe ARDS, where both oxygenation and lung mechanics were impaired. The PROSEVA trial finally showed the benefits of prone position on mortality supporting the thesis that the clinical advantages of prone position, instead of improved gas exchange, were mainly due to a less harmful mechanical ventilation and better distribution of stress and strain. In less severe ARDS, in spite of a better gas exchange, reduced mechanical stress and strain, and improved oxygenation, prone position was ineffective on outcome.

Prone position and COVID-19

The mechanisms of oxygenation impairment in early COVID-19 are different than in typical ARDS and relate more on perfusion alteration than on alveolar consolidation/collapse, which are minimal in the early phase. Bronchial shunt may also contribute to the early COVID-19 hypoxemia. Therefore, in this phase, the oxygenation improvement in prone position is due to a better matching of local ventilation and perfusion, primarily caused by the perfusion component. Unfortunately, the conditions for improved outcomes, i.e. a better distribution of stress and strain, are almost absent in this phase of COVID-19 disease, as the lung parenchyma is nearly fully inflated. Due to some contradictory results, further studies are needed to better investigate the effect of prone position on outcome in COVID-19 patients.

Graphical Abstract

Paradoxical response to chest wall loading predicts a favorable mechanical response to reduction in tidal volume or PEEP

Background

Chest wall loading has been shown to paradoxically improve respiratory system compliance (CRS) in patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The most likely, albeit unconfirmed, mechanism is relief of end-tidal overdistension in ‘baby lungs’ of low-capacity. The purpose of this study was to define how small changes of tidal volume (VT) and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) affect CRS (and its associated airway pressures) in patients with ARDS who demonstrate a paradoxical response to chest wall loading. We hypothesized that small reductions of VT or PEEP would alleviate overdistension and favorably affect CRS and conversely, that small increases of VT or PEEP would worsen CRS.

Methods

Prospective, multi-center physiologic study of seventeen patients with moderate to severe ARDS who demonstrated paradoxical responses to chest wall loading. All patients received mechanical ventilation in volume control mode and were passively ventilated. Airway pressures were measured before and after decreasing/increasing VT by 1 ml/kg predicted body weight and decreasing/increasing PEEP by 2.5 cmH2O.

Results

Decreasing either VT or PEEP improved CRS in all patients. Driving pressure (DP) decreased by a mean of 4.9 cmH2O (supine) and by 4.3 cmH2O (prone) after decreasing VT, and by a mean of 2.9 cmH2O (supine) and 2.2 cmH2O (prone) after decreasing PEEP. CRS increased by a mean of 3.1 ml/cmH2O (supine) and by 2.5 ml/cmH2O (prone) after decreasing VT. CRS increased by a mean of 5.2 ml/cmH2O (supine) and 3.6 ml/cmH2O (prone) after decreasing PEEP (P < 0.01 for all). Small increments of either VT or PEEP worsened CRS in the majority of patients.

Conclusion

Patients with a paradoxical response to chest wall loading demonstrate uniform improvement in both DP and CRS following a reduction in either VT or PEEP, findings in keeping with prior evidence suggesting its presence is a sign of end-tidal overdistension. The presence of ‘paradox’ should prompt re-evaluation of modifiable determinants of end-tidal overdistension, including VT, PEEP, and body position.

Paradoxical Positioning: Does "Head Up" Always Improve Mechanics and Lung Protection?

OBJECTIVES

Head-elevated body positioning, a default clinical practice, predictably increases end-expiratory transpulmonary pressure and aerated lung volume. In acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), however, the net effect of such vertical inclination on tidal mechanics depends upon whether lung recruitment or overdistension predominates. We hypothesized that in moderate to severe ARDS, bed inclination toward vertical unloads the chest wall but adversely affects overall respiratory system compliance (C rs ).

DESIGN

Prospective physiologic study.

SETTING

Two medical ICUs in the United States.

PATIENTS

Seventeen patients with ARDS, predominantly moderate to severe.

INTERVENTION

Patients were ventilated passively by volume control. We measured airway pressures at baseline (noninclined) and following bed inclination toward vertical by an additional 15°. At baseline and following inclination, we manually loaded the chest wall to determine if C rs increased or paradoxically declined, suggestive of end-tidal overdistension.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Inclination resulted in a higher plateau pressure (supineΔ: 2.8 ± 3.3 cm H 2 O [ p = 0.01]; proneΔ: 3.3 ± 2.5 cm H 2 O [ p = 0.004]), higher driving pressure (supineΔ: 2.9 ± 3.3 cm H 2 O [ p = 0.01]; proneΔ: 3.3 ± 2.8 cm H 2 O [ p = 0.007]), and lower C rs (supine Δ: 3.4 ± 3.7 mL/cm H 2 O [ p = 0.01]; proneΔ: 3.1 ± 3.2 mL/cm H 2 O [ p = 0.02]). Following inclination, manual loading of the chest wall restored C rs and driving pressure to baseline (preinclination) values.

CONCLUSIONS

In advanced ARDS, bed inclination toward vertical adversely affects C rs and therefore affects the numerical values for plateau and driving tidal pressures commonly targeted in lung protective strategies. These changes are fully reversed with manual loading of the chest wall, suggestive of end-tidal overdistension in the upright position. Body inclination should be considered a modifiable determinant of transpulmonary pressure and lung protection, directionally similar to tidal volume and positive end-expiratory pressure.

Assessment of Heterogeneity in Lung Structure and Function During Mechanical Ventilation: A Review of Methodologies

The mammalian lung is characterized by heterogeneity in both its structure and function, by incorporating an asymmetric branching airway tree optimized for maintenance of efficient ventilation, perfusion, and gas exchange. Despite potential benefits of naturally occurring heterogeneity in the lungs, there may also be detrimental effects arising from pathologic processes, which may result in deficiencies in gas transport and exchange. Regardless of etiology, pathologic heterogeneity results in the maldistribution of regional ventilation and perfusion, impairments in gas exchange, and increased work of breathing. In extreme situations, heterogeneity may result in respiratory failure, necessitating support with a mechanical ventilator. This review will present a summary of measurement techniques for assessing and quantifying heterogeneity in respiratory system structure and function during mechanical ventilation. These methods have been grouped according to four broad categories: (1) inverse modeling of heterogeneous mechanical function; (2) capnography and washout techniques to measure heterogeneity of gas transport; (3) measurements of heterogeneous deformation on the surface of the lung; and finally (4) imaging techniques used to observe spatially-distributed ventilation or regional deformation. Each technique varies with regard to spatial and temporal resolution, degrees of invasiveness, risks posed to patients, as well as suitability for clinical implementation. Nonetheless, each technique provides a unique perspective on the manifestations and consequences of mechanical heterogeneity in the diseased lung.

Optic nerve sheath diameter is associated with outcome in severe Covid-19

Neurological symptoms are common in Covid-19 and cerebral edema has been shown post-mortem. The mechanism behind this is unclear. Elevated intracranial pressure (ICP) has not been extensively studied in Covid-19. ICP can be estimated noninvasively with measurements of the optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD). We performed a cohort study with ONSD ultrasound measurements in severe cases of Covid-19 at an intensive care unit (ICU). We measured ONSD with ultrasound in adults with severe Covid-19 in the ICU at Karolinska University Hospital in Sweden. Patients were classified as either having normal or elevated ONSD. We compared ICU length of stay (ICU-LOS) and 90 day mortality between the groups. 54 patients were included. 11 of these (20.4%) had elevated ONSD. Patients with elevated ONSD had 12 days longer ICU-LOS (95% CI 2 to 23 p = 0.03) and a risk ratio of 2.3 for ICU-LOS ≥ 30 days. There were no significant differences in baseline data or 90 day mortality between the groups. Elevated ONSD is common in severe Covid-19 and is associated with adverse outcome. This may be caused by elevated ICP. This is a clinically important finding that needs to be considered when deciding upon various treatment strategies.

Chest wall loading during supine and prone position in patients with COVID-19 ARDS: effects on respiratory mechanics and gas exchange

Background

Recent reports of patients with severe, late-stage COVID-19 ARDS with reduced respiratory system compliance described paradoxical decreases in plateau pressure and increases in respiratory system compliance in response to anterior chest wall loading. We aimed to assess the effect of chest wall loading during supine and prone position in ill patients with COVID-19-related ARDS and to investigate the effect of a low or normal baseline respiratory system compliance on the findings.

Methods

This is a single-center, prospective, cohort study in the intensive care unit of a COVID-19 referral center. Consecutive mechanically ventilated, critically ill patients with COVID-19-related ARDS were enrolled and classified as higher (≥ 40 ml/cmH₂O) or lower respiratory system compliance (< 40 ml/cmH₂O). The study included four steps, each lasting 6 h: Step 1, supine position, Step 2, 10-kg continuous chest wall compression (supine + weight), Step 3, prone position, Step 4, 10-kg continuous chest wall compression (prone + weight). The mechanical properties of the respiratory system, gas exchange and alveolar dead space were measured at the end of each step.

Results

Totally, 40 patients were enrolled. In the whole cohort, neither oxygenation nor respiratory system compliance changed between supine and supine + weight; both increased during prone positioning and were unaffected by chest wall loading in the prone position. Alveolar dead space was unchanged during all the steps. In 16 patients with reduced compliance, PaO₂/FiO₂ significantly increased from supine to supine + weight and further with prone and prone + weight (107 ± 15.4 vs. 120 ± 18.5 vs. 146 ± 27.0 vs. 159 ± 30.4, respectively; p < 0.001); alveolar dead space decreased from both supine and prone position after chest wall loading, and respiratory system compliance significantly increased from supine to supine + weight and from prone to prone + weight (23.9 ± 3.5 vs. 30.9 ± 5.7 and 31.1 ± 5.7 vs. 37.8 ± 8.7 ml/cmH₂O, p < 0.001). The improvement was higher the lower the baseline compliance.

Conclusions

Unlike prone positioning, chest wall loading had no effects on respiratory system compliance, gas exchange or alveolar dead space in an unselected cohort of critically ill patients with C-ARDS. Only patients with a low respiratory system compliance experienced an improvement, with a higher response the lower the baseline compliance.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-022-04141-7.

Paradoxical response to chest wall loading predicts a favorable mechanical response to reduction in tidal volume or PEEP

BACKGROUND

Chest wall loading has been shown to paradoxically improve respiratory system compliance (C_RS) in patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The most likely, albeit unconfirmed, mechanism is relief of end-tidal overdistension in 'baby lungs' of low-capacity. The purpose of this study was to define how small changes of tidal volume (V_T) and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) affect C_RS (and its associated airway pressures) in patients with ARDS who demonstrate a paradoxical response to chest wall loading. We hypothesized that small reductions of V_T or PEEP would alleviate overdistension and favorably affect C_RS and conversely, that small increases of V_T or PEEP would worsen C_RS.

METHODS

Prospective, multi-center physiologic study of seventeen patients with moderate to severe ARDS who demonstrated paradoxical responses to chest wall loading. All patients received mechanical ventilation in volume control mode and were passively ventilated. Airway pressures were measured before and after decreasing/increasing V_T by 1 ml/kg predicted body weight and decreasing/increasing PEEP by 2.5 cmH₂O.

RESULTS

Decreasing either V_T or PEEP improved C_RS in all patients. Driving pressure (DP) decreased by a mean of 4.9 cmH₂O (supine) and by 4.3 cmH₂O (prone) after decreasing V_T, and by a mean of 2.9 cmH₂O (supine) and 2.2 cmH₂O (prone) after decreasing PEEP. C_RS increased by a mean of 3.1 ml/cmH₂O (supine) and by 2.5 ml/cmH₂O (prone) after decreasing V_T. C_RS increased by a mean of 5.2 ml/cmH₂O (supine) and 3.6 ml/cmH₂O (prone) after decreasing PEEP (P < 0.01 for all). Small increments of either V_T or PEEP worsened C_RS in the majority of patients.

CONCLUSION

Patients with a paradoxical response to chest wall loading demonstrate uniform improvement in both DP and C_RS following a reduction in either V_T or PEEP, findings in keeping with prior evidence suggesting its presence is a sign of end-tidal overdistension. The presence of 'paradox' should prompt re-evaluation of modifiable determinants of end-tidal overdistension, including V_T, PEEP, and body position.

Monitoring Lung Injury Severity and Ventilation Intensity during Mechanical Ventilation

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a severe form of respiratory failure burden by high hospital mortality. No specific pharmacologic treatment is currently available and its ventilatory management is a key strategy to allow reparative and regenerative lung tissue processes. Unfortunately, a poor management of mechanical ventilation can induce ventilation induced lung injury (VILI) caused by physical and biological forces which are at play. Different parameters have been described over the years to assess lung injury severity and facilitate optimization of mechanical ventilation. Indices of lung injury severity include variables related to gas exchange abnormalities, ventilatory setting and respiratory mechanics, ventilation intensity, and the presence of lung hyperinflation versus derecruitment. Recently, specific indexes have been proposed to quantify the stress and the strain released over time using more comprehensive algorithms of calculation such as the mechanical power, and the interaction between driving pressure (DP) and respiratory rate (RR) in the novel DP multiplied by four plus RR [(4 × DP) + RR] index. These new parameters introduce the concept of ventilation intensity as contributing factor of VILI. Ventilation intensity should be taken into account to optimize protective mechanical ventilation strategies, with the aim to reduce intensity to the lowest level required to maintain gas exchange to reduce the potential for VILI. This is further gaining relevance in the current era of phenotyping and enrichment strategies in ARDS.

External chest-wall compression in prolonged COVID-19 ARDS with low-compliance: a physiological study

Background

External chest-wall compression (ECC) is sometimes used in ARDS patients despite lack of evidence. It is currently unknown whether this practice has any clinical benefit in patients with COVID-19 ARDS (C-ARDS) characterized by a respiratory system compliance (C_rs) < 35 mL/cmH₂O.

Objectives

To test if an ECC with a 5 L-bag in low-compliance C-ARDS can lead to a reduction in driving pressure (DP) and improve gas exchange, and to understand the underlying mechanisms.

Methods

Eleven patients with low-compliance C-ARDS were enrolled and underwent 4 steps: baseline, ECC for 60 min, ECC discontinuation and PEEP reduction. Respiratory mechanics, gas exchange, hemodynamics and electrical impedance tomography were recorded. Four pigs with acute ARDS were studied with ECC to understand the effect of ECC on pleural pressure gradient using pleural pressure transducers in both non-dependent and dependent lung regions.

Results

Five minutes of ECC reduced DP from baseline 14.2 ± 1.3 to 12.3 ± 1.3 cmH₂O (P < 0.001), explained by an improved lung compliance. Changes in DP by ECC were strongly correlated with changes in DP obtained with PEEP reduction (R² = 0.82, P < 0.001). The initial benefit of ECC decreased over time (DP = 13.3 ± 1.5 cmH₂O at 60 min, P = 0.03 vs. baseline). Gas exchange and hemodynamics were unaffected by ECC. In four pigs with lung injury, ECC led to a decrease in the pleural pressure gradient at end-inspiration [2.2 (1.1–3) vs. 3.0 (2.2–4.1) cmH₂O, P = 0.035].

Conclusions

In C-ARDS patients with C_rs < 35 mL/cmH₂O, ECC acutely reduces DP. ECC does not improve oxygenation but it can be used as a simple tool to detect hyperinflation as it improves C_rs and reduces P_pl gradient. ECC benefits seem to partially fade over time. ECC produces similar changes compared to PEEP reduction.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13613-022-01008-6.

Effects of different positive end-expiratory pressure titration strategies during prone positioning in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a prospective interventional study

Background

Prone positioning in combination with the application of low tidal volume and adequate positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) improves survival in patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, the effects of PEEP on end-expiratory transpulmonary pressure (Ptp_exp) during prone positioning require clarification. For this purpose, the effects of three different PEEP titration strategies on Ptp_exp, respiratory mechanics, mechanical power, gas exchange, and hemodynamics were evaluated comparing supine and prone positioning.

Methods

In forty consecutive patients with moderate to severe ARDS protective ventilation with PEEP titrated according to three different titration strategies was evaluated during supine and prone positioning: (A) ARDS Network recommendations (PEEP_ARDSNetwork), (B) the lowest static elastance of the respiratory system (PEEP_Estat,RS), and (C) targeting a positive Ptp_exp (PEEP_Ptpexp). The primary endpoint was to analyze whether Ptp_exp differed significantly according to PEEP titration strategy during supine and prone positioning.

Results

Ptp_exp increased progressively with prone positioning compared with supine positioning as well as with PEEP_Estat,RS and PEEP_Ptpexp compared with PEEP_ARDSNetwork (positioning effect p < 0.001, PEEP strategy effect p < 0.001). PEEP was lower during prone positioning with PEEP_Estat,RS and PEEP_Ptpexp (positioning effect p < 0.001, PEEP strategy effect p < 0.001). During supine positioning, mechanical power increased progressively with PEEP_Estat,RS and PEEP_Ptpexp compared with PEEP_ARDSNetwork, and prone positioning attenuated this effect (positioning effect p < 0.001, PEEP strategy effect p < 0.001). Prone compared with supine positioning significantly improved oxygenation (positioning effect p < 0.001, PEEP strategy effect p < 0.001) while hemodynamics remained stable in both positions.

Conclusions

Prone positioning increased transpulmonary pressures while improving oxygenation and hemodynamics in patients with moderate to severe ARDS when PEEP was titrated according to the ARDS Network lower PEEP table. This PEEP titration strategy minimized parameters associated with ventilator-induced lung injury induction, such as transpulmonary driving pressure and mechanical power. We propose that a lower PEEP strategy (PEEP_ARDSNetwork) in combination with prone positioning may be part of a lung protective ventilation strategy in patients with moderate to severe ARDS.

Trial registration

German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00017449). Registered June 27, 2019. https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00017449

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-022-03956-8.

Sequential lateral positioning as a new lung recruitment maneuver: an exploratory study in early mechanically ventilated Covid-19 ARDS patients

Background

A sequential change in body position from supine-to-both lateral positions under constant ventilatory settings could be used as a postural recruitment maneuver in case of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), provided that sufficient positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) prevents derecruitment. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility and physiological effects of a sequential postural recruitment maneuver in early mechanically ventilated COVID-19 ARDS patients.

Methods

A cohort of 15 patients receiving lung-protective mechanical ventilation in volume-controlled with PEEP based on recruitability were prospectively enrolled and evaluated in five sequentially applied positions for 30 min each: Supine-baseline; Lateral-1st side; 2nd Supine; Lateral-2nd side; Supine-final. PEEP level was selected using the recruitment-to-inflation ratio (R/I ratio) based on which patients received PEEP 12 cmH₂O for R/I ratio ≤ 0.5 or PEEP 15 cmH₂O for R/I ratio > 0.5. At the end of each period, we measured respiratory mechanics, arterial blood gases, lung ultrasound aeration, end-expiratory lung impedance (EELI), and regional distribution of ventilation and perfusion using electric impedance tomography (EIT).

Results

Comparing supine baseline and final, respiratory compliance (29 ± 9 vs 32 ± 8 mL/cmH₂O; p < 0.01) and PaO₂/FIO₂ ratio (138 ± 36 vs 164 ± 46 mmHg; p < 0.01) increased, while driving pressure (13 ± 2 vs 11 ± 2 cmH₂O; p < 0.01) and lung ultrasound consolidation score decreased [5 (4–5) vs 2 (1–4); p < 0.01]. EELI decreased ventrally (218 ± 205 mL; p < 0.01) and increased dorsally (192 ± 475 mL; p = 0.02), while regional compliance increased in both ventral (11.5 ± 0.7 vs 12.9 ± 0.8 mL/cmH₂O; p < 0.01) and dorsal regions (17.1 ± 1.8 vs 18.8 ± 1.8 mL/cmH₂O; p < 0.01). Dorsal distribution of perfusion increased (64.8 ± 7.3% vs 66.3 ± 7.2%; p = 0.01).

Conclusions

Without increasing airway pressure, a sequential postural recruitment maneuver improves global and regional respiratory mechanics and gas exchange along with a redistribution of EELI from ventral to dorsal lung areas and less consolidation.

Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04475068. Registered 17 July 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04475068

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13613-022-00988-9.

Dorsal Push and Abdominal Binding Improve Respiratory Compliance and Driving Pressure in Proned Coronavirus Disease 2019 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

We describe seven proned patients with coronavirus disease 2019-related acute respiratory distress syndrome in whom a paradoxical decrease in driving pressure reversibly occurred during passive, volume-controlled ventilation when compressing the lower back by a sustained "dorsal push." We offer a potential explanation for these unexpected observations and suggest the possible importance of eliciting this response for lung-protective ventilation of similar patients.

DESIGN/SETTING

Case series at a single teaching hospital affiliated with the University of Minnesota. Measurements were recorded from continuously monitored airway pressure and flow data.

PATIENTS

Nonconsecutive and nonrandomized sample of coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients who were already prone and paralyzed for optimized lung protective clinical management while inhaling pure oxygen.

INTERVENTIONS

Sustained, firm manual pressure applied over the lower back in all patients, followed by abdominal binding in a subset of these.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Respiratory system driving pressure declined and respiratory system compliance improved in seven patients with the dorsal push maneuver. In a subset of four of these, abdominal binding sustained those improvements over >3 hours.

CONCLUSIONS

Sustained compressive force applied to the dorsum of the passive and prone patient with severe respiratory failure due to coronavirus disease pneumonia may elicit a paradoxical response characterized by improved compliance and for a given tidal volume, lower plateau, and driving pressures. Such findings, which suggest end-tidal overinflation within the aerated part of the diseased lung despite the already compressed anterior chest wall of prone positioning, complement and extend those observations recently described for the supine position in coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome.