Clinical correlation with changing radiographic appearance during partial liquid ventilation

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There are several reports of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) use in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who develop severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to guide clinical decision-making and future research.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane and Scopus databases from 1 December 2019 to 10 January 2021 for observational studies or randomised clinical trials examining ECMO in adults with COVID-19 ARDS. We performed random-effects meta-analyses and meta-regression, assessed risk of bias using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist and rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. Survival outcomes were presented as pooled proportions while continuous outcomes were presented as pooled means, both with corresponding 95% confidence intervals [CIs]. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were duration of ECMO therapy and mechanical ventilation, weaning rate from ECMO and complications during ECMO.

RESULTS

We included twenty-two observational studies with 1896 patients in the meta-analysis. Venovenous ECMO was the predominant mode used (98.6%). The pooled in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients (22 studies, 1896 patients) supported with ECMO was 37.1% (95% CI 32.3-42.0%, high certainty). Pooled mortality in the venovenous ECMO group was 35.7% (95% CI 30.7-40.7%, high certainty). Meta-regression found that age and ECMO duration were associated with increased mortality. Duration of ECMO support (18 studies, 1844 patients) was 15.1 days (95% CI 13.4-18.7). Weaning from ECMO (17 studies, 1412 patients) was accomplished in 67.6% (95% CI 50.5-82.7%) of patients. There were a total of 1583 ECMO complications reported (18 studies, 1721 patients) and renal complications were the most common.

CONCLUSION

The majority of patients received venovenous ECMO support for COVID-19-related ARDS. In-hospital mortality in patients receiving ECMO support for COVID-19 was 37.1% during the first year of the pandemic, similar to those with non-COVID-19-related ARDS. Increasing age was a risk factor for death. Venovenous ECMO appears to be an effective intervention in selected patients with COVID-19-related ARDS. PROSPERO CRD42020192627.

Partial liquid ventilation for preventing death and morbidity in adults with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome

BACKGROUND

Acute lung injury (ALI) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are syndromes of severe respiratory failure that are associated with substantial mortality and morbidity. Artifical ventilatory support is commonly required and may exacerbate lung injury. Partial liquid ventilation (PLV) has been proposed as a less injurious form of ventilatory support for these patients. Although PLV has been shown to improve gas exchange and to reduce inflammation in experimental models of ALI, a previous systematic review did not find any evidence to support or refute its use in humans with ALI and ARDS.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this review was to assess whether PLV reduced mortality (at 28 d, at discharge from the intensive care unit (ICU), at discharge from hospital and at one, two and five years) in adults with ALI or ARDS when compared with conventional ventilatory support.Secondary objectives were to determine how PLV compared with conventional ventilation with regard to duration of invasive mechanical ventilation, duration of respiratory support, duration of oxygen therapy, length of ICU stay, length of hospital stay, incidence of infection, long-term cognitive impairment, long-term health related quality of life, long- term lung function, long-term morbidity costs and adverse events. The following adverse events were considered: hypoxia (arterial PO2 <80 mm Hg), pneumothorax (any air leak into the pleural space requiring therapeutic intervention), hypotension (systolic blood pressure < 90 mm Hg sustained for longer than two minutes or requiring treatment with fluids or vasoactive drugs), bradycardia (heart rate < 50 beats per minute sustained for longer than one minute or requiring therapeutic intervention) and cardiac arrest (absence of effective cardiac output).

SEARCH METHODS

In this updated review, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL Issue 10, 2012, in The Cochrane Library; MEDLINE (Ovid SP, 1966 to November 2012); EMBASE (Ovid SP, 1980 to November 2012) and CINAHL (EBSCOhost,1982 to November 2012) for published studies. In our original review, we searched until May 2004.Grey literature was identified by searching conference proceedings and trial registries and by contacting experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

As in the original review, review authors selected randomized controlled trials that compared PLV with other forms of ventilation in adults (16 y of age or older) with ALI or ARDS, reporting one or more of the following: mortality; duration of mechanical ventilation, respiratory support, oxygen therapy, stay in the intensive care unit or stay in hospital; infection; long-term cognitive impairment or health-related quality of life; long-term lung function or cost.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently evaluated the quality of the relevant studies and extracted the data from included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

In this updated review, one new eligible study was identified and included, yielding a total of two eligible studies (including a combined total of 401 participants). Of those 401 participants, 170 received 'high'-dose partial liquid ventilation (i.e. a mean dose of at least 20 mL/kg), 99 received 'low-dose' partial liquid ventilation (i.e. a dose of 10 mL/kg) and 132 received conventional mechanical ventilation (CMV). Pooled estimates of effect were calculated for all those who received 'high'-dose PLV versus conventional ventilation. No evidence indicated that 'high'-dose PLV either reduced mortality at 28 d (risk ratio (RR) 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 1.85, P = 0.37) or increased the number of days free of CMV at 28 d (mean difference (MD) -2.24, 95% CI -4.71 to 0.23, P = 0.08). The pooled estimate of effect for bradycardia in those who received PLV was significantly greater than in those who received CMV (RR 2.51, 95% CI 1.31 to 4.81, P = 0.005). Pooled estimates of effect for the following adverse events- hypoxia, pneumothorax, hypotension and cardiac arrest- all showed a nonsignificant trend towards a higher occurrence of these events in those treated with PLV. Because neither eligible study addressed morbidity or mortality beyond 28 d, it was not possible to determine the effect of PLV on these outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No evidence supports the use of PLV in ALI or ARDS; some evidence suggests an increased risk of adverse events associated with its use.

Radiographic detection of perflubron fluoromediastinum and fluororetroperitoneum 9 years after partial liquid ventilation

A 17-year-old patient presented, after a motor vehicle collision, with right hip pain and unusual radiographs of the chest and pelvis. Multiple radiopacities obscured detail. These partly obscured and distracted attention from a right acetabular fracture. The etiology was persistent perflubron 9 years after partial liquid ventilation for acute respiratory distress syndrome. Persistence of perflubron beyond 138 days has not been previously reported. We review the imaging appearance of perflubron and the mechanism likely related to its distribution and persistence in this case, and emphasize the importance of obtaining clinical history and avoiding distraction when faced with unusual radiographic findings.

Partial liquid ventilation

We describe the technique of partial liquid ventilation and outline its indications. We present our imaging experience with this infrequently used therapy using a wide variety of radiographs from neonatal and adult patients. The radiographic appearance of white lungs, due to the perfluorocarbons used in partial liquid ventilation, may initially be rather perplexing, but can be an advantage in diagnosing certain complications of mechanical ventilation, outlining pathology and demonstrating normal anatomy in an unusual manner.

Partial liquid ventilation for preventing death and morbidity in adults with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome

BACKGROUND

Acute lung injury (ALI), and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), are syndromes of severe respiratory failure. Adults with ALI or ARDS have high mortality and significant morbidity. Partial liquid ventilation (PLV) may be better (i.e., cause less lung damage) for these patients than other forms of respiratory support. Uncontrolled studies in adults have shown improvement in gas exchange and lung compliance with partial liquid ventilation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether partial liquid ventilation reduces morbidity and mortality in adults with ALI or ARDS.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2004; MEDLINE (1966 to May 2004); and CINAHL (1982 to May 2004); intensive care journals and conference proceedings; reference lists and unpublished literature.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials which compared partial liquid ventilation with other forms of ventilation, in adults (16 years old or greater) with ALI or ARDS, reporting one or more of the following: mortality; duration of mechanical ventilation, respiratory support, oxygen therapy, stay in the intensive care unit, or stay in hospital; infection; long term cognitive impairment or health related quality of life; long term lung function; or cost.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently evaluated the quality of the relevant studies and extracted the data from the included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

Problems with the inadequacy of the primary report of the one included study do not allow us to report any quantitative results for patients with ALI or ARDS. The only outcome we considered to be of clinical significance and reported for all enrolled patients (i.e., patients with ALI and ARDS and less severe respiratory insufficiency) was 28 day mortality. There was no statistically significant difference between groups for this outcome with a relative risk for 28 day mortality in the PLV group of 1.15 (95% confidence intervals of 0.64 to 2.10).

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence from randomized controlled trials to support or refute the use of partial liquid ventilation in adults with ALI or ARDS; adequately powered, high quality randomized controlled trials are still needed to assess its efficacy. Clinically relevant outcome measures should be assessed (especially mortality at discharge and later, duration of respiratory support and hospital stay, and long term cognitive and quality of life outcomes) and the studies should be published in full.