ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 is associated with morbidity and mortality. Current anti-inflammatory therapies are effective but are given systemically and have significant side effects. Furosemide has anti-inflammatory properties, can be administered by inhalation, and is inexpensive. We investigated the efficacy of nebulized furosemide as an adjunctive therapy for COVID-19 respiratory failure. DESIGN: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: Multicenter ICU study. PATIENTS: Adults requiring invasive mechanical ventilation secondary to COVID-19. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized within 48 hours of intubation to receive inhaled furosemide or placebo until day 28, death, or liberation from mechanical ventilation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The study was stopped early due to waning incidence of COVID-19; 39 patients were available for analysis with mean ± sd age of 70.5 (10.8) years, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II 26.1 (7.8) and Fio2 60.0% (21.9). Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. For the primary outcome of change in Pao2/Fio2 ratio between day 1 and day 6, it was +31.4 (83.5) in the furosemide arm versus +20.1 (92.8) in the control (p = 0.58). For secondary outcomes, furosemide versus control: 60-day mortality was 48% versus 71% (p = 0.20), hospital stay was 25.6 (21.9) versus 27.4 (25.0) days, p = 0.94 and VFD was 6.0 (9.1) versus 3.1 (7.1), p value of equals to 0.28. A post hoc analysis of the hierarchical composite outcome, alive and ventilator-free favored furosemide. There were no adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial of inhaled furosemide for COVID-19 respiratory failure, differences in Pao2/Fio2 ratio to day 6 and other clinical outcomes were not significantly different, although the trial was underpowered due to early termination. Given the favorable profile of inhaled furosemide, further study is warranted in disease states where acute pulmonary inflammation contributes to the underlying pathophysiology.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Critically ill patients are at high risk of acquiring ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), which occurs in approximately 20% of mechanically ventilated patients. VAP results either from aspiration of pathogen-contaminated oropharyngeal secretions or contaminated biofilms that form on endotracheal tubes (ETTs) after intubation. VAP results in increased duration of mechanical ventilation, increased intensive care unit and hospital length of stay, increased risk of death and increased healthcare costs. Because of its impact on patient outcomes and the healthcare system, VAP is regarded as an important patient safety issue and there is an urgent need for better evidence on the efficacy of prevention strategies. Modified ETTs that reduce aspiration of oropharyngeal secretions with subglottic secretion drainage or reduce the occurrence of biofilm with a coating of ceragenins (CSAs) are available for clinical use in Canada. In this implementation study, we will evaluate the efficacy of these two types of Health Canada-licensed ETTs on the occurrence of VAP, and impact on patient-centred outcomes. METHODS: In this ongoing, pragmatic, prospective, longitudinal, interrupted time, cross-over implementation study, we will compare the efficacy of a CSA-coated ETT (CeraShield N8 Pharma) with an ETT with subglottic secretion drainage (Taper Guard, Covidien). The study periods consist of four alternating time periods of 11 or 12 weeks or a total of 23 weeks for each ETT. All patients intubated with the study ETT in each time period will be included in an intention-to-treat analysis. Outcomes will include VAP incidence, mortality and health services utilisation including antibiotic use and length of stay. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the Health Sciences Research Ethics Board at Queen's University. The results of this study will be actively disseminated through manuscript publication and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05761613.
