Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
Eur J Intern Med ; 100: 110-118, 2022 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1800087

ABSTRACT

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE: Various forms of Non-invasive respiratory support (NRS) have been used during COVID-19, to treat Hypoxemic Acute Respiratory Failure (HARF), but it has been suggested that the occurrence of strenuous inspiratory efforts may cause Self Induced Lung Injury(P-SILI). The aim of this investigation was to record esophageal pressure, when starting NRS application, so as to better understand the potential risk of the patients in terms of P-SILI and ventilator induced lung injury (VILI). METHODS AND MEASUREMENTS: 21 patients with early de-novo respiratory failure due to COVID-19, underwent three 30 min trials applied in random order: high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC), continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), and non-invasive ventilation (NIV). After each trial, standard oxygen therapy was reinstituted using a Venturi mask (VM). 15 patients accepted a nasogastric tube placement. Esophageal Pressure (ΔPes) and dynamic transpulmonary driving pressure (ΔPLDyn), together with the breathing pattern using a bioelectrical impedance monitor were recorded. Arterial blood gases were collected in all patients. MAIN RESULTS: No statistically significant differences in breathing pattern and PaCO2 were found. PaO2/FiO2 ratio improved significantly during NIV and CPAP vs VM. NIV was the only NRS to reduce significantly ΔPes vs. VM (-10,2 ±5 cmH20 vs -3,9 ±3,4). No differences were found in ΔPLDyn between NRS (10,2±5; 9,9±3,8; 7,6±4,3; 8,8±3,6 during VM, HFNC, CPAP and NIV respectively). Minute ventilation (Ve) was directly dependent on the patient's inspiratory effort, irrespective of the NRS applied. 14% of patients were intubated, none of them showing a reduction in ΔPes during NRS. CONCLUSIONS: In the early phase of HARF due to COVID-19, the inspiratory effort may not be markedly elevated and the application of NIV and CPAP ameliorates oxygenation vs VM. NIV was superior in reducing ΔPes, maintaining ΔPLDyn within a range of potential safety.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Noninvasive Ventilation , Respiratory Insufficiency , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Hypoxia/therapy , Noninvasive Ventilation/methods , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy/methods , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy
2.
Respiration ; 101(4): 381-393, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1632218

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Few studies have reported a double-step follow-up of patients after hospitalization for COVID-19. OBJECTIVES: We designed an observational double-step follow-up study with a clinical, functional, and radiological evaluation at 2 and 6 months after COVID-19. The primary outcome was to describe symptoms, spirometry, and 6-minute walking test (6MWT) at 2 and 6 months. Secondary outcomes were to identify if the lowest PaO2/FiO2 during hospitalization is related with functional and radiological evolution and to assess the correlation between radiological and functional abnormalities at 6 months. METHODS: Symptoms, spirometry, and 6MWT were assessed at 2 and 6 months; arterial blood gas, chest x-ray, and lung ultrasound were performed at 2 months; body plethysmography, diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO), and CT scan were performed at 6 months. RESULTS: Sixty-four per cent and 42% of patients reported at least one symptom at 2 and 6 months, respectively. The most common 6-month functional alteration was DLCO impairment (57% of patients). An improvement of FEV1, FVC, and 6MWT was observed between 2 and 6 months (p < 0.001). Patients with PaO2/FiO2 <200 during hospitalization performed worse at 6MWT at 2 and 6 months (p < 0.05) and reported more extended radiological abnormalities at 6 months (p < 0.001) compared with patients with PaO2/FiO2>200. At 6 months, more extended radiological abnormalities were related with worse 6MWT, DLCO, and total lung capacity (p < 0.05). DISCUSSION: DLCO and 6MWT impairment seem to be the functional hallmark of COVID-19 and are related with the severity of acute pneumonia. At 6 months, radiological abnormalities were related to functional impairment.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pneumonia , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Lung/diagnostic imaging , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Respir Med ; 189: 106665, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1475040

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) impairment is often reported among COVID-19 ICU survivors, and little is known about their long-term outcomes. We evaluated the HRQoL trajectories between 3 months and 1 year after ICU discharge, the factors influencing these trajectories and the presence of clusters of HRQoL profiles in a population of COVID-19 patients who underwent invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Moreover, pathophysiological correlations of residual dyspnea were tested. METHODS: We followed up 178 survivors from 16 Italian ICUs up to one year after ICU discharge. HRQoL was investigated through the 15D instrument. Available pulmonary function tests (PFTs) and chest CT scans at 1 year were also collected. A linear mixed-effects model was adopted to identify factors associated with different HRQoL trajectories and a two-step cluster analysis was performed to identify HRQoL clusters. RESULTS: We found that HRQoL increased during the study period, especially for the significant increase of the physical dimensions, while the mental dimensions and dyspnea remained substantially unchanged. Four main 15D profiles were identified: full recovery (47.2%), bad recovery (5.1%) and two partial recovery clusters with mostly physical (9.6%) or mental (38.2%) dimensions affected. Gender, duration of IMV and number of comorbidities significantly influenced HRQoL trajectories. Persistent dyspnea was reported in 58.4% of patients, and weakly, but significantly, correlated with both DLCO and length of IMV. CONCLUSIONS: HRQoL impairment is frequent 1 year after ICU discharge, and the lowest recovery is found in the mental dimensions. Persistent dyspnea is often reported and weakly correlated with PFTs alterations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04411459.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Intensive Care Units , Quality of Life , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Function Tests , Aged , Dyspnea/epidemiology , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Discharge , Prospective Studies , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/epidemiology , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Survivors
5.
Eur J Intern Med ; 92: 48-54, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1272399

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Up to fifteen percent of patients with novel pandemic coronavirus disease (Covid-19) have acute respiratory failure (ARF). Ratio between arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) and fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2), P/F, is currently used as a marker of ARF severity in Covid-19. P/F does not reflect the respiratory efforts made by patients to maintain arterial blood oxygenation, such as tachypnea and hyperpnea, leading to hypocapnia. Standard PaO2, the value of PaO2 adjusted for arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2) of the subject, better reflects the pathophysiology of hypoxemic ARF. We hypothesized that the ratio between standard PaO2 over FiO2 (STP/F) better predicts Covid-19 ARF severity compared to P/F. METHODS: Aim of this pilot prospectic observational study was to observe differences between STP/F and P/F in predicting outcome failure, defined as need of invasive mechanical ventilation and/or deaths in Covid-19 ARF. Accuracy was calculated using Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) analysis and areas under the ROC curve (AUROC) were compared. RESULTS: 349 consecutive subjects admitted to our respiratory wards due to Covid-19 ARF were enrolled. STP/F was accurate to predict mortality and superior to P/F with, respectively, AUROC 0.710 versus 0.688, p = 0.012.Both STP/F and PF were accurate to predict outcome failure (AUROC respectively of 0.747 and 0.742, p = 0.590). DISCUSSION: This is the first study assessing the role of STP/F in describing severity of ARF in Covid-19. According to results, STP/F is accurate and superior to P/F in predicting in-hospital mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Insufficiency , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Oxygen , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Pulmonology ; 28(1): 13-17, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1246146

ABSTRACT

High flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is used to treat acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) even outside the ICU and the ROX index (pulse oximetry/fraction of inspired oxygen/respiratory rate) may predict HFNC failure. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this investigation was therefore to verify whether the ROX index is an accurate predictor of HFNC failure for COVID-19 patients treated outside the intensive care unit (ICU) and to evaluate the validity of the previously suggested threshold. DESIGN: Multicenter study. Retrospective observational analysis of prospectively collected data. SETTING: 3 centres specialized in non-invasive respiratory support (Buenos Aires, Argentina; Bolzano and Treviso, Italy). Patients treated outside the ICU were analysed MEASUREMENTS: The variables to calculate the ROX index were collected during the first day of therapy at 2, 6, 12 and 24 hours and then recorded every 24 hours. HFNC failure was defined as escalation of respiratory support to invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or death. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 35 (29%) patients failed HFNC and required intubation. ROC analysis identified the 12-hour ROX index as the best predictor of intubation with an AUC of 0.7916[CI 95% 0.6905-0.8927] and the best threshold to be 5.99[Specificity 96% Sensitivity 62%]. In the survival analysis, a ROX value <5.99 was associated with an increased risk of failure (p = 0008 log - rank test). The threshold of 4,9 identified by Roca as the best predictor in non-COVID patients, was not able to discriminate between success and failure (p = 0.4 log-rank test) in our patients. CONCLUSIONS: ROX index may be useful in guiding the clinicians in their decision to intubate patients, especially in patients with moderate ARF, treated therefore outside the ICU. Indeed, it also demonstrates a different threshold value than reported for non-COVID patients, possibly related to the different mechanisms of hypoxia.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Noninvasive Ventilation , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy/methods , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Intubation, Intratracheal , Noninvasive Ventilation/methods , Oximetry , Respiratory Rate/physiology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
7.
Pulmonology ; 2021 Mar 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1144904

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted in two teaching hospitals over a 3-month period (March 2010-June 2020) comparing severe and critical COVID-19 patients admitted to Respiratory Intensive Care Unit for non-invasive respiratory support (NRS) and subjected to awake prone position (PP) with those receiving standard care (SC). Primary outcome was endotracheal intubation (ETI) rate. In-hospital mortality, time to ETI, tracheostomy, length of RICU and hospital stay served as secondary outcomes. Risk factors associated to ETI among PP patients were also investigated. RESULTS: A total of 114 patients were included, 76 in the SC and 38 in the PP group. Unadjusted Kaplan-Meier estimates showed greater effect of PP compared to SC on ETI rate (HR = 0.45 95% CI [0.2-0.9], p = 0.02) even after adjustment for baseline confounders (HR = 0.59 95% CI [0.3-0.94], p = 0.03). After stratification according to non-invasive respiratory support, PP showed greater significant benefit for those on High Flow Nasal Cannulae (HR = 0.34 95% CI [0.12-0.84], p = 0.04). Compared to SC, PP patients also showed a favorable difference in terms of days free from respiratory support, length of RICU and hospital stay while mortality and tracheostomy rate were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: Prone positioning in awake and spontaneously breathing Covid-19 patients is feasible and associated with a reduction of intubation rate, especially in those patients undergoing HFNC. Although our results are intriguing, further randomized controlled trials are needed to answer all the open questions remaining pending about the real efficacy of PP in this setting.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL