ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The interest in protective ventilation strategies and individualized approaches for patients with severe illness on veno venous extracorporeal support has increased in recent years. Wide heterogeneity exists among patients with COVID-19 related acute respiratory distress syndrome (C-ARDS) and ARDS from other etiologies (NC-ARDS). EIT is a useful tool for the accurate analysis of regional lung volume distribution and allows for a tailored ventilatory setting. The aim of this work is to retrospectively describe the results of EIT assessments performed in patients C-ARDS and NC-ARDS undergoing V-V ECMO support. METHODS: A clinical EIT-guided decremental PEEP trail was conducted for all patients included in the study and mechanically ventilated. RESULTS: 12 patients with C-ARDS and 12 patients with NC-ARDS were included in the study for a total of 13 and 18 EIT evaluations, respectively. No significant differences in arterial blood gas, respiratory parameters, and regional ventilation before and after the EIT exam were recorded. The subset of patients with NC-ARDS whose EIT exam led to PEEP modification was characterized by a lower baseline compliance compared with the C-ARDS group: 18 (16-28) vs. 27 (24-30) (p = 0.04). Overdistension significantly increased at higher steps only for the NC-ARDS group. A higher percentage of overdistension was described in patients with NC-ARDS when compared with patients with C-ARDS. CONCLUSIONS: EIT is feasible in patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS on veno-venous extracorporeal support and may help in tailoring the PEEP setting. Overall, severe COVID-19-related ARDS presents respiratory characteristics similar to severe "classical" NC-ARDS. However, C-ARDS is associated with a lower risk of overdistension at a higher PEEP level compared with NC-ARDS.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic is challenging advanced health systems, which are dealing with an overwhelming number of patients in need of intensive care for respiratory failure, often requiring intubation. Prone positioning in intubated patients is known to reduce mortality in moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. We aimed to investigate feasibility and effect on gas exchange of prone positioning in awake, non-intubated patients with COVID-19-related pneumonia. METHODS: In this prospective, feasibility, cohort study, patients aged 18-75 years with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19-related pneumonia receiving supplemental oxygen or non-invasive continuous positive airway pressure were recruited from San Gerardo Hospital, Monza, Italy. We collected baseline data on demographics, anthropometrics, arterial blood gas, and ventilation parameters. After baseline data collection, patients were helped into the prone position, which was maintained for a minimum duration of 3 h. Clinical data were re-collected 10 min after prone positioning and 1 h after returning to the supine position. The main study outcome was the variation in oxygenation (partial pressure of oxygen [PaO2]/fractional concentration of oxygen in inspired air [FiO2]) between baseline and resupination, as an index of pulmonary recruitment. This study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04365959, and is now complete. FINDINGS: Between March 20 and April 9, 2020, we enrolled 56 patients, of whom 44 (79%) were male; the mean age was 57·4 years (SD 7·4) and the mean BMI was 27·5 kg/m2 (3·7). Prone positioning was feasible (ie, maintained for at least 3 h) in 47 patients (83·9% [95% CI 71·7 to 92·4]). Oxygenation substantially improved from supine to prone positioning (PaO2/FiO2 ratio 180·5 mm Hg [SD 76·6] in supine position vs 285·5 mm Hg [112·9] in prone position; p<0·0001). After resupination, improved oxygenation was maintained in 23 patients (50·0% [95% CI 34·9-65·1]; ie, responders); however, this improvement was on average not significant compared with before prone positioning (PaO2/FiO2 ratio 192·9 mm Hg [100·9] 1 h after resupination; p=0·29). Patients who maintained increased oxygenation had increased levels of inflammatory markers (C-reactive protein: 12·7 mg/L [SD 6·9] in responders vs 8·4 mg/L [6·2] in non-responders; and platelets: 241·1â×â103/µL [101·9] vs 319·8â×â103/µL [120·6]) and shorter time between admission to hospital and prone positioning (2·7 days [SD 2·1] in responders vs 4·6 days [3·7] in non-responders) than did those for whom improved oxygenation was not maintained. 13 (28%) of 46 patients were eventually intubated, seven (30%) of 23 responders and six (26%) of 23 non-responders (p=0·74). Five patients died during follow-up due to underlying disease, unrelated to study procedure. INTERPRETATION: Prone positioning was feasible and effective in rapidly ameliorating blood oxygenation in awake patients with COVID-19-related pneumonia requiring oxygen supplementation. The effect was maintained after resupination in half of the patients. Further studies are warranted to ascertain the potential benefit of this technique in improving final respiratory and global outcomes. FUNDING: University of Milan-Bicocca.