Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 71, 2022 03 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1765460

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Delaying time to prone positioning (PP) may be associated with higher mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We evaluated the use and the impact of early PP on clinical outcomes in intubated patients hospitalized in intensive care units (ICUs) for COVID-19. METHODS: All intubated patients with ARDS due to COVID-19 were involved in a secondary analysis from a prospective multicenter cohort study of COVID-ICU network including 149 ICUs across France, Belgium and Switzerland. Patients were followed-up until Day-90. The primary outcome was survival at Day-60. Analysis used a Cox proportional hazard model including a propensity score. RESULTS: Among 2137 intubated patients, 1504 (70.4%) were placed in PP during their ICU stay and 491 (23%) during the first 24 h following ICU admission. One hundred and eighty-one patients (36.9%) of the early PP group had a PaO2/FiO2 ratio > 150 mmHg when prone positioning was initiated. Among non-early PP group patients, 1013 (47.4%) patients had finally been placed in PP within a median delay of 3 days after ICU admission. Day-60 mortality in non-early PP group was 34.2% versus 39.3% in the early PP group (p = 0.038). Day-28 and Day-90 mortality as well as the need for adjunctive therapies was more important in patients with early PP. After propensity score adjustment, no significant difference in survival at Day-60 was found between the two study groups (HR 1.34 [0.96-1.68], p = 0.09 and HR 1.19 [0.998-1.412], p = 0.053 in complete case analysis or in multiple imputation analysis, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In a large multicentric international cohort of intubated ICU patients with ARDS due to COVID-19, PP has been used frequently as a main treatment. In this study, our data failed to show a survival benefit associated with early PP started within 24 h after ICU admission compared to PP after day-1 for all COVID-19 patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation regardless of their severity.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , COVID-19/therapy , Cohort Studies , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Prone Position , Propensity Score , Prospective Studies , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy
2.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-322644

ABSTRACT

Background: Delaying time to prone positioning (PP) may be associated with higher mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We evaluated the use and the impact of early PP on clinical outcomes in intubated patients hospitalized in intensive care units (ICUs) for COVID-19. Methods: All intubated patients with ARDS due to COVID-19 were involved in a secondary analysis from a prospective multicenter cohort study of COVID-ICU network including 149 ICUs across France, Belgian and Switzerland. Patients were followed-up until Day-90. The primary outcome was survival at Day-60. Analysis used a Cox proportional hazard model including a propensity score. Results: Among 2137 intubated patients, 1504 (70.4%) were placed in PP during their ICU stay, and 491 (23%) during the first 24 hrs following ICU admission. One hundred and eighty-one patients (36.9%) of the early PP group had a PaO 2 /FiO 2 ratio > 150 mmHg when prone positioning was initiated. Among non-early PP group patients, 1013 (47.4%) patients had finally been placed in PP within a median delay of 3 days after ICU admission. Day-60 mortality in non-early PP group was 34.2% vs. 39.3% in the early PP group ( p = 0.038). Day-28 and Day-90 mortality as well as the need for adjunctive therapies were more important in patients with early PP. After propensity score adjustment, no significant difference in survival at Day-60 was found between the two-study groups (HR 1.34 [0.96-1.68], p =0.09 and HR 1.19 [0.998-1.412], p =0.053 in complete case analysis or in multiple imputation analysis, respectively). Conclusions: In a large multicentric international cohort of intubated ICU patients with ARDS due to COVID-19, PP has been used frequently as a main treatment. In this study, early PP started within 24 hrs after ICU admission was not associated with a survival benefit compared to PP after day 1.

3.
Trials ; 22(1): 692, 2021 Oct 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1463262

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a severe complication of COVID-19 pneumonia, with a mortality rate amounting to 34-50% in moderate and severe ARDS, and is associated with prolonged duration of invasive mechanical ventilation. Such as in non-COVID ARDS, harmful mechanical ventilation settings might be associated with worse outcomes. Reducing the tidal volume down to 4 mL kg-1 of predicted body weight (PBW) to provide ultra-low tidal volume ventilation (ULTV) is an appealing technique to minimize ventilator-inducted lung injury. Furthermore, in the context of a worldwide pandemic, it does not require any additional material and consumables and may be applied in low- to middle-income countries. We hypothesized that ULTV without extracorporeal circulation is a credible option to reduce COVID-19-related ARDS mortality and duration of mechanical ventilation. METHODS: The VT4COVID study is a randomized, multi-centric prospective open-labeled, controlled superiority trial. Adult patients admitted in the intensive care unit with COVID-19-related mild to severe ARDS defined by a PaO2/FiO2 ratio ≤ 150 mmHg under invasive mechanical ventilation for less than 48 h, and consent to participate to the study will be eligible. Patients will be randomized into two balanced parallels groups, at a 1:1 ratio. The control group will be ventilated with protective ventilation settings (tidal volume 6 mL kg-1 PBW), and the intervention group will be ventilated with ULTV (tidal volume 4 mL kg-1 PBW). The primary outcome is a composite score based on 90-day all-cause mortality as a prioritized criterion and the number of ventilator-free days at day 60 after inclusion. The randomization list will be stratified by site of recruitment and generated using random blocks of sizes 4 and 6. Data will be analyzed using intention-to-treat principles. DISCUSSION: The purpose of this manuscript is to provide primary publication of study protocol to prevent selective reporting of outcomes, data-driven analysis, and to increase transparency. Enrollment of patients in the study is ongoing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04349618 . Registered on April 16, 2020.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Adult , Extracorporeal Circulation , Humans , Prospective Studies , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnosis , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , SARS-CoV-2
4.
J Clin Med ; 10(11)2021 May 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1266749

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To address the issue of ventilator shortages, our group (eSpiro Network) developed a freely replicable, open-source hardware ventilator. DESIGN: We performed a bench study. SETTING: Dedicated research room as part of an ICU affiliated to a university hospital. SUBJECTS: We set the lung model with three conditions of resistance and linear compliance for mimicking different respiratory mechanics of representative intensive care unit (ICU) patients. INTERVENTIONS: The performance of the device was tested using the ASL5000 lung model. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-seven conditions were tested. All the measurements fell within the ±10% limits for the tidal volume (VT). The volume error was influenced by the mechanical condition (p = 5.9 × 10-15) and the PEEP level (P = 1.1 × 10-12) but the clinical significance of this finding is likely meaningless (maximum -34 mL in the error). The PEEP error was not influenced by the mechanical condition (p = 0.25). Our experimental results demonstrate that the eSpiro ventilator is reliable to deliver VT and PEEP accurately in various respiratory mechanics conditions. CONCLUSIONS: We report a low-cost, easy-to-build ventilator, which is reliable to deliver VT and PEEP in passive invasive mechanical ventilation.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL