Effects of bradycardia, hypoxemia and early intubation on bronchopulmonary dysplasia in very preterm infants: An observational study

BACKGROUND

Bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) is the most common pulmonary complication in preterm infants.

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to explore the effects of bradycardia, hypoxemia, and early intubation on BPD in very preterm infants.

METHODS

This is a prospective observational cohort study. Preterm infants with a mean gestational age of 28.67 weeks were recruited from two level III neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) in Taiwan. Continuous electrocardiography was used to monitor heart rates and oxygen saturation (SpO2). Infants were monitored for heart rates of <100 beats per minute and SpO2 levels of <90 % lasting for 30 s. Generalized estimating equations were used to analyze the effects of bradycardia, hypoxemia, and early intubation on BPD in very preterm infants. Model fit was visually assessed using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis.

RESULTS

Bradycardia, hypoxemia, and early intubation significantly increased the odds of BPD among the preterm infants (N = 39) during NICU stay; the odds ratios for bradycardia, hypoxemia, and early intubation for BPD versus non-BPD were 1.058, 1.013, and 29.631, respectively (all p < 0.05). A model combining bradycardia, hypoxemia, and early intubation accurately predicted BPD development (area under the curve = 0.919).

CONCLUSIONS

Bradycardia, hypoxemia, and early intubation significantly increased the odds of BPD among very preterm infants during NICU stay. The model combining bradycardia, hypoxemia, and early intubation accurately predicted BPD development.

Early intubation and clinical outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Evidence regarding the timing of the application of mechanical ventilation among patients with severe coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is insufficient. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of early intubation compared to late intubation in patients with severe and critical COVID-19.

METHODS

For this study, we searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases as well as one Korean domestic database on July 15, 2021. We updated the search monthly from September 10, 2021 to February 10, 2022. Studies that compared early intubation with late intubation in patients with severe COVID-19 were eligible for inclusion. Relative risk (RR) and mean difference (MD) were calculated as measures of effect using the random-effects model for the pooled estimates of in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), duration of mechanical ventilation (MV), hospital LOS, ICU-free days, and ventilator-free days. Subgroup analysis was performed based on the definition of early intubation and the index time. To assess the risk of bias in the included studies, we used the Risk of Bias Assessment tool for Non-randomized studies 2.0.

RESULTS

Of the 1523 records identified, 12 cohort studies, involving 2843 patients with severe COVID-19 were eligible. There were no differences in in-hospital mortality (8 studies, n = 795; RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.75-1.10, P = 0.32, I² = 33%), LOS in the ICU (9 studies, n = 978; MD -1.77 days, 95% CI -4.61 to 1.07 days, P = 0.22, I² = 78%), MV duration (9 studies, n = 1,066; MD -0.03 day, 95% CI -1.79 to 1.72 days, P = 0.97, I² = 49%), ICU-free days (1 study, n = 32; 0 day vs. 0 day; P = 0.39), and ventilator-free days (4 studies, n = 344; MD 0.94 day, 95% CI -4.56 to 6.43 days, P = 0.74, I² = 54%) between the early and late intubation groups. However, the early intubation group had significant advantage in terms of hospital LOS (6 studies, n = 738; MD -4.32 days, 95% CI -7.20 to -1.44 days, P = 0.003, I² = 45%).

CONCLUSION

This study showed no significant difference in both primary and secondary outcomes between the early intubation and late intubation groups. Trial registration This study was registered in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews on 16 February, 2022 (registration number CRD42022311122).

Comparison of clinical characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 patients undergoing early versus late intubation from initial hospital admission: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The true impact of intubation and mechanical ventilation in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients remains controversial.

METHODS

We searched Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases from inception to October 30th, 2021 for studies containing comparative data of COVID-19 patients undergoing early versus late intubation from initial hospital admission. Early intubation was defined as intubation within 48 h of hospital admission. The primary outcomes assessed were all-cause in-hospital mortality, renal replacement therapy (RRT), and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) duration.

RESULTS

Four cohort studies with 498 COVID-19 patients were included between February to August 2020, in which 28.6% had early intubation, and 36.0% underwent late intubation. Although the pooled hospital mortality rate was 32.1%, no significant difference in mortality rate was observed (odds ratio [OR] 0.81; 95% confidence interval 0.32-2.00; P = 0.64) among those undergoing early and late intubation. IMV duration (mean 9.62 vs. 11.77 days; P = 0.25) and RRT requirement (18.3% vs. 14.6%; OR 1.19; P = 0.59) were similar regardless of intubation timing. While age, sex, diabetes, and body mass index were comparable, patients undergoing early intubation had higher sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) scores (mean 7.00 vs. 5.17; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The timing of intubation from initial hospital admission did not significantly alter clinical outcomes during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Higher SOFA scores could explain early intubation. With the advancements in COVID-19 therapies, more research is required to determine optimal intubation time beyond the first wave of the pandemic.

Impact of time to intubation on mortality and pulmonary sequelae in critically ill patients with COVID-19: a prospective cohort study

Question

We evaluated whether the time between first respiratory support and intubation of patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) due to COVID-19 was associated with mortality or pulmonary sequelae.

Materials and methods

Prospective cohort of critical COVID-19 patients on IMV. Patients were classified as early intubation if they were intubated within the first 48 h from the first respiratory support or delayed intubation if they were intubated later. Surviving patients were evaluated after hospital discharge.

Results

We included 205 patients (140 with early IMV and 65 with delayed IMV). The median [p₂₅;p₇₅] age was 63 [56.0; 70.0] years, and 74.1% were male. The survival analysis showed a significant increase in the risk of mortality in the delayed group with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 2.45 (95% CI 1.29–4.65). The continuous predictor time to IMV showed a nonlinear association with the risk of in-hospital mortality. A multivariate mortality model showed that delay of IMV was a factor associated with mortality (HR of 2.40; 95% CI 1.42–4.1). During follow-up, patients in the delayed group showed a worse DLCO (mean difference of − 10.77 (95% CI − 18.40 to − 3.15), with a greater number of affected lobes (+ 1.51 [95% CI 0.89–2.13]) and a greater TSS (+ 4.35 [95% CI 2.41–6.27]) in the chest CT scan.

Conclusions

Among critically ill patients with COVID-19 who required IMV, the delay in intubation from the first respiratory support was associated with an increase in hospital mortality and worse pulmonary sequelae during follow-up.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-021-03882-1.