1
|
Guérin C, Beuret P, Constantin JM, Bellani G, Garcia-Olivares P, Roca O, Meertens JH, Maia PA, Becher T, Peterson J, Larsson A, Gurjar M, Hajjej Z, Kovari F, Assiri AH, Mainas E, Hasan MS, Morocho-Tutillo DR, Baboi L, Chrétien JM, François G, Ayzac L, Chen L, Brochard L, Mercat A. A prospective international observational prevalence study on prone positioning of ARDS patients: the APRONET (ARDS Prone Position Network) study. Intensive Care Med 2017; 44:22-37. [PMID: 29218379 DOI: 10.1007/s00134-017-4996-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 179] [Impact Index Per Article: 25.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2017] [Accepted: 11/11/2017] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION While prone positioning (PP) has been shown to improve patient survival in moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients, the rate of application of PP in clinical practice still appears low. AIM This study aimed to determine the prevalence of use of PP in ARDS patients (primary endpoint), the physiological effects of PP, and the reasons for not using it (secondary endpoints). METHODS The APRONET study was a prospective international 1-day prevalence study performed four times in April, July, and October 2016 and January 2017. On each study day, investigators in each ICU had to screen every patient. For patients with ARDS, use of PP, gas exchange, ventilator settings and plateau pressure (Pplat) were recorded before and at the end of the PP session. Complications of PP and reasons for not using PP were also documented. Values are presented as median (1st-3rd quartiles). RESULTS Over the study period, 6723 patients were screened in 141 ICUs from 20 countries (77% of the ICUs were European), of whom 735 had ARDS and were analyzed. Overall 101 ARDS patients had at least one session of PP (13.7%), with no differences among the 4 study days. The rate of PP use was 5.9% (11/187), 10.3% (41/399) and 32.9% (49/149) in mild, moderate and severe ARDS, respectively (P = 0.0001). The duration of the first PP session was 18 (16-23) hours. Measured with the patient in the supine position before and at the end of the first PP session, PaO2/FIO2 increased from 101 (76-136) to 171 (118-220) mmHg (P = 0.0001) driving pressure decreased from 14 [11-17] to 13 [10-16] cmH2O (P = 0.001), and Pplat decreased from 26 [23-29] to 25 [23-28] cmH2O (P = 0.04). The most prevalent reason for not using PP (64.3%) was that hypoxemia was not considered sufficiently severe. Complications were reported in 12 patients (11.9%) in whom PP was used (pressure sores in five, hypoxemia in two, endotracheal tube-related in two ocular in two, and a transient increase in intracranial pressure in one). CONCLUSIONS In conclusion, this prospective international prevalence study found that PP was used in 32.9% of patients with severe ARDS, and was associated with low complication rates, significant increase in oxygenation and a significant decrease in driving pressure.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C Guérin
- Réanimation Médicale Hôpital de la Croix Rousse, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France. .,Université de Lyon, Lyon, France. .,IMRB INSERM 955 Créteil, Créteil, France. .,INSERM, 955, Creteil, France.
| | - P Beuret
- Réanimation polyvalente Roanne, Roanne, France
| | - J M Constantin
- Department of Preoperative Medicine, University Hospital of Clermont-Ferrand, Clermont-Ferrand, France.,Faculté de médecine, GReD, UMR,CNRS6293, UCA, INSERM, U1103 R2D2 EA-7281, Université d'Auvergne, Clermont-Ferrand, France
| | - G Bellani
- Dipartimento di Medicina e Chirurgia Monza, Università degli Studi Milano Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | | | - O Roca
- Critical Care Department, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Vall d'Hebron Research Institute, Barcelona, Spain.,Ciber Enfermedades Respiratorias (Ciberes), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
| | - J H Meertens
- Department of Critical Care, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - P Azevedo Maia
- Cuidados intensivos-Centro Hospitalar do Porto, Porto, Portugal
| | - T Becher
- Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - J Peterson
- Function Perioperative Medicine and Intensive Care, Karolinska University Hospital Solna, Stockholm, Sweden.,Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, Section of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - A Larsson
- Hedenstierna Laboratory, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.,Department of Critical Care Medicine, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, India
| | - M Gurjar
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, India
| | - Z Hajjej
- Department of Critical Care Medicine and Anesthesiology, Military Hospital of Tunis, Tunis, Tunisia
| | - F Kovari
- The North Middlesex University Hospital Trust, London, UK
| | - A H Assiri
- Aseer Central Hospital, Abha, Saudi Arabia
| | - E Mainas
- Hippokrateion General Hospital of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - M S Hasan
- University Malaya Medical Centre, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
| | - D R Morocho-Tutillo
- Unidad de Terapia Intensiva Hospital de Especialidades Eugenio Espejo, Quito, Ecuador
| | - L Baboi
- Réanimation Médicale Hôpital de la Croix Rousse, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France
| | - J M Chrétien
- CHU Angers-DRCi-Cellule Gestion des Données et Evaluation, Angers, France
| | - G François
- Division of Scientific Affairs-Research, ESICM, Brussels, Belgium
| | - L Ayzac
- Centre de coordination et de lutte contre les infections nosocomiales (C-CLIN) Sud-Est, Pierre Bénite, France
| | - L Chen
- Saint Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada
| | - L Brochard
- Saint Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada
| | - A Mercat
- Médecine Intensive et Réanimation, CHU Angers, Angers, France.,Université d'Angers, Angers, France
| | | |
Collapse
|