ABSTRACT
Introduction: The aim of this study was to determine whether there is an association between extravascular lung water index (EVLWi) and physiological respiratory dead space (VDphys/VT) and to determine if these factors are associated with the possibility to being discharged alive on day 28. Method(s): We analyzed a prospective cohort of patients with COVID ARDS supported with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) admitted in our ICU who were monitored with volumetric capnography and transpulmonary thermodilution (TPTD). First day TDTP and VDphys/VT were considered. Bohr-Enghoff formula was used to obtain VDphys/ VT. This protocol was approved by the local IRB and informed consent was waived. Result(s): 31 patients with matched TPTD and VDphys/VT during the first 24 h were analyzed in who EVLWi correlated with VDphys/VT (r = 0.599 p = 0.002), however, EVLWi did not associated with PaFi. Patients with EVLWi > 10 ml/kg had higher APACHE II and VDphys/VT. These patients had a lower cumulative incidence to be discharged alive on day 28 with aHR 7.3 [1.4-39.1] p = 0.02 (adjusted by APACHE II and VDphys/VT, Fig. 1A). Remarkably, patients with EVLWi > 10 ml/ kg + VDphys/VT > 57% had worse outcome compared to those who had EVLWi > 10 ml/kg + VDphys/VT < 57% (25% vs 75%, p = 0.032, Fig. 1B). Conclusion(s): In patients with COVID ARDS supported with IMV, VDphys/VT give prognostic data additional to EVLWi.
ABSTRACT
During acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), the increase in pulmonary vascular permeability and lung water induced by pulmonary inflammation may be related to altered lung compliance. A better understanding of the interactions between respiratory mechanics variables and lung water or capillary permeability would allow a more personalized monitoring and adaptation of therapies for patients with ARDS. Therefore, our main objective was to investigate the relationship between extravascular lung water (EVLW) and/or pulmonary vascular permeability index (PVPI) and respiratory mechanic variables in patients with COVID-19-induced ARDS. This is a retrospective observational study from prospectively collected data in a cohort of 107 critically ill patients with COVID-19-induced ARDS from March 2020 to May 2021. We analyzed relationships between variables using repeated measurements correlations. We found no clinically relevant correlations between EVLW and the respiratory mechanics variables (driving pressure (correlation coefficient [CI 95%]: 0.017 [-0.064; 0.098]), plateau pressure (0.123 [0.043; 0.202]), respiratory system compliance (-0.003 [-0.084; 0.079]) or positive end-expiratory pressure (0.203 [0.126; 0.278])). Similarly, there were no relevant correlations between PVPI and these same respiratory mechanics variables (0.051 [-0.131; 0.035], 0.059 [-0.022; 0.140], 0.072 [-0.090; 0.153] and 0.22 [0.141; 0.293], respectively). In a cohort of patients with COVID-19-induced ARDS, EVLW and PVPI values are independent from respiratory system compliance and driving pressure. Optimal monitoring of these patients should combine both respiratory and TPTD variables.
ABSTRACT
In severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) has been proposed as a therapeutic strategy to possibly reduce mortality. Transpulmonary thermodilution (TPTD) enables monitoring of the extravascular lung water index (EVLWI) and cardiac preload parameters such as intrathoracic blood volume index (ITBVI) in patients with ARDS, but it is not generally recommended during V-V ECMO. We hypothesized that the amount of extracorporeal blood flow (ECBF) influences the calculation of EVLWI and ITBVI due to recirculation of indicator, which affects the measurement of the mean transit time (MTt), the time between injection and passing of half the indicator, as well as downslope time (DSt), the exponential washout of the indicator. EVLWI and ITBVI were measured in 20 patients with severe ARDS managed with V-V ECMO at ECBF rates from 6 to 4 and 2 l/min with TPTD. MTt and DSt significantly decreased when ECBF was reduced, resulting in a decreased EVLWI (26.1 [22.8-33.8] ml/kg at 6 l/min ECBF vs 22.4 [15.3-31.6] ml/kg at 4 l/min ECBF, p < 0.001; and 13.2 [11.8-18.8] ml/kg at 2 l/min ECBF, p < 0.001) and increased ITBVI (840 [753-1062] ml/m2 at 6 l/min ECBF vs 886 [658-979] ml/m2 at 4 l/min ECBF, p < 0.001; and 955 [817-1140] ml/m2 at 2 l/min ECBF, p < 0.001). In patients with severe ARDS managed with V-V ECMO, increasing ECBF alters the thermodilution curve, resulting in unreliable measurements of EVLWI and ITBVI. German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00021050). Registered 14/08/2018. https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00021050.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: We tested the effect of different blood flow levels in the extracorporeal circuit on the measurements of cardiac stroke volume (SV), global end-diastolic volume index (GEDVI) and extravascular lung water index derived from transpulmonary thermodilution (TPTD) in 20 patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) treated with veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). METHODS: Comparative SV measurements with transesophageal echocardiography and TPTD were performed at least 5 times during the treatment of the patients. The data were interpreted with a Bland-Altman analysis corrected for repeated measurements. The interchangeability between both measurement modalities was calculated and the effects of extracorporeal blood flow on SV measurements with TPTD was analysed with a linear mixed effect model. GEDVI and EVLWI measurements were performed immediately before the termination of the ECMO therapy at a blood flow of 6 l/min, 4 l/min and 2 l/min and after the disconnection of the circuit in 7 patients. RESULTS: 170 pairs of comparative SV measurements were analysed. Average difference between the two modalities (bias) was 0.28 ml with an upper level of agreement of 40 ml and a lower level of agreement of -39 ml within a 95% confidence interval and an overall interchangeability rate between TPTD and Echo of 64%. ECMO blood flow did not influence the mean bias between Echo and TPTD (0.03 ml per l/min of ECMO blood flow; p = 0.992; CI - 6.74 to 6.81). GEDVI measurement was not significantly influenced by the blood flow in the ECMO circuit, whereas EVLWI differed at a blood flow of 6 l/min compared to no ECMO flow (25.9 ± 10.1 vs. 11.0 ± 4.2 ml/kg, p = 0.0035). CONCLUSIONS: Irrespectively of an established ECMO therapy, comparative SV measurements with Echo and TPTD are not interchangeable. Such caveats also apply to the interpretation of EVLWI, especially with a high blood flow in the extracorporeal circulation. In such situations, the clinician should rely on other methods of evaluation of the amount of lung oedema with the haemodynamic situation, vasopressor support and cumulative fluid balance in mind. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00021050). Registered 03/30/2020 https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00017237.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: COVID-19 can cause a clinical spectrum from asymptomatic disease to life-threatening respiratory failure and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). There is an ongoing discussion whether the clinical presentation and ventilatory parameters are the same as typical ARDS or not. There is no clear understanding of how the hemodynamic parameters have been affected in COVID-19 ARDS patients. We aimed to compare hemodynamic and respiratory parameters of moderate and severe COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS patients. These patients were monitored with an advanced hemodynamic measurement system by the transpulmonary thermodilution method in prone and supine positions. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data of 17 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and 16 patients diagnosed with other types of diseases with moderate and severe ARDS, mechanically ventilated, placed in a prone position, had advanced hemodynamic measurements with PiCCO, and stayed in the intensive care unit for more than a week were analyzed retrospectively. Patient characteristics and arterial blood gases analysis recorded at admission and respiratory and advanced hemodynamic parameters during the first week were compared in prone and supine positions. RESULTS: No difference was observed in the respiratory parameters including respiratory system compliance between COVID-19 and non-COVD-19 patients in prone and supine positions. In comparison of advanced hemodynamic parameters in the first week of intensive care, the extravascular lung water and pulmonary vascular permeability indexes measured in supine position of COVID-19 ARDS patients were found to be significantly higher than non-COVID-19 patients. Duration of prone position was significantly longer in patients diagnosed with COVID-19 ARDS. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggested that COVID-19 ARDS is a variant of typical ARDS with a different pathophysiology. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Asar S, Acicbe Ö, Sabaz MS, Tontu F, Canan E, Cukurova Z, et al. Comparison of Respiratory and Hemodynamic Parameters of COVID-19 and Non-COVID-19 ARDS Patients. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(6):704-708.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), extravascular lung water index (EVLWi) and pulmonary vascular permeability index (PVPI) measured by transpulmonary thermodilution reflect the degree of lung injury. Whether EVLWi and PVPI are different between non-COVID-19 ARDS and the ARDS due to COVID-19 has never been reported. We aimed at comparing EVLWi, PVPI, respiratory mechanics and hemodynamics in patients with COVID-19 ARDS vs. ARDS of other origin. METHODS: Between March and October 2020, in an observational study conducted in intensive care units from three university hospitals, 60 patients with COVID-19-related ARDS monitored by transpulmonary thermodilution were compared to the 60 consecutive non-COVID-19 ARDS admitted immediately before the COVID-19 outbreak between December 2018 and February 2020. RESULTS: Driving pressure was similar between patients with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS, at baseline as well as during the study period. Compared to patients without COVID-19, those with COVID-19 exhibited higher EVLWi, both at the baseline (17 (14-21) vs. 15 (11-19) mL/kg, respectively, p = 0.03) and at the time of its maximal value (24 (18-27) vs. 21 (15-24) mL/kg, respectively, p = 0.01). Similar results were observed for PVPI. In COVID-19 patients, the worst ratio between arterial oxygen partial pressure over oxygen inspired fraction was lower (81 (70-109) vs. 100 (80-124) mmHg, respectively, p = 0.02) and prone positioning and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) were more frequently used than in patients without COVID-19. COVID-19 patients had lower maximal lactate level and maximal norepinephrine dose than patients without COVID-19. Day-60 mortality was similar between groups (57% vs. 65%, respectively, p = 0.45). The maximal value of EVLWi and PVPI remained independently associated with outcome in the whole cohort. CONCLUSION: Compared to ARDS patients without COVID-19, patients with COVID-19 had similar lung mechanics, but higher EVLWi and PVPI values from the beginning of the disease. This was associated with worse oxygenation and with more requirement of prone positioning and ECMO. This is compatible with the specific lung inflammation and severe diffuse alveolar damage related to COVID-19. By contrast, patients with COVID-19 had fewer hemodynamic derangement. Eventually, mortality was similar between groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER AND DATE OF REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04337983). Registered 30 March 2020-Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04337983 .