Building toolkits for COPD exacerbations: lessons from the past and present

In the nineteenth century, it was recognised that acute attacks of chronic bronchitis were harmful. 140 years later, it is clearer than ever that exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (ECOPD) are important events. They are associated with significant mortality, morbidity, a reduced quality of life and an increasing reliance on social care. ECOPD are common and are increasing in prevalence. Exacerbations beget exacerbations, with up to a quarter of in-patient episodes ending with readmission to hospital within 30 days. The healthcare costs are immense. Yet despite this, the tools available to diagnose and treat ECOPD are essentially unchanged, with the last new intervention (non-invasive ventilation) introduced over 25 years ago.An ECOPD is ‘an acute worsening of respiratory symptoms that results in additional therapy’. This symptom and healthcare utility-based definition does not describe pathology and is unable to differentiate from other causes of an acute deterioration in breathlessness with or without a cough and sputum. There is limited understanding of the host immune response during an acute event and no reliable and readily available means to identify aetiology or direct treatment at the point of care (POC). Corticosteroids, short acting bronchodilators with or without antibiotics have been the mainstay of treatment for over 30 years. This is in stark contrast to many other acute presentations of chronic illness, where specific biomarkers and mechanistic understanding has revolutionised care pathways. So why has progress been so slow in ECOPD? This review examines the history of diagnosing and treating ECOPD. It suggests that to move forward, there needs to be an acceptance that not all exacerbations are alike (just as not all COPD is alike) and that clinical presentation alone cannot identify aetiology or stratify treatment.

Download Full-text

Extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal for treatment of exacerbated chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (ORION): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Trials ◽

10.1186/s13063-021-05692-w ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 22 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Tommaso Tonetti ◽

Lara Pisani ◽

Irene Cavalli ◽

Maria Laura Vega ◽

Elisa Maietti ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Mechanical Ventilation ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽

Chronic Obstructive ◽

Invasive Ventilation ◽

Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ◽

Non Invasive ◽

Non Invasive Ventilation ◽

Acute Exacerbations

Abstract Background Hypercapnic exacerbations are severe complications of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), characterized by negative impact on prognosis, quality of life and healthcare costs. The present standard of care for acute exacerbations of COPD is non-invasive ventilation; when it fails, the use of invasive mechanical ventilation is inevitable, but is associated with extremely poor prognosis. Extracorporeal circuits designed to remove CO2 (ECCO2R) may enhance the efficacy of NIV to remove CO2 and avoid the worsening of respiratory acidosis, which inevitably leads to failure of non-invasive ventilation. Although the use of ECCO2R for acute exacerbations of COPD is steadily increasing, solid evidence on its efficacy and safety is scarce, thus the need for a randomized controlled trial. Methods multicenter randomized controlled unblinded clinical trial including 284 (142 per arm) patients with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure caused by exacerbation of COPD, requiring respiratory support with NIV. The primary outcome is event free survival at 28 days, a composite outcome defined by survival in absence of prolonged mechanical ventilation, severe hypoxemia, septic shock and second episode of COPD exacerbation. Secondary outcomes are incidence of endotracheal intubation and tracheostomy, intensive care and hospital length-of-stay and 90-day mortality. Discussion Acute exacerbations of COPD represent a significant burden in terms of prognosis, quality of life and healthcare costs. Lack definite evidence despite increasing use of ECCO2R justifies a randomized trial to evaluate whether patients with acute hypercapnic acidosis not responsive to NIV should undergo invasive mechanical ventilation (with all serious related risks) or be treated with ECCO2R to avoid invasive ventilation but be exposed to possible adverse events of ECCO2R. Owing to its pragmatic nature, sample size and composite primary outcome, this trial aims at providing valuable answers to relevant questions for clinical treatment of acute exacerbations of COPD. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04582799. Registered 12 October 2020, .

Download Full-text

Respiratory support in COPD patients after acute exacerbation with monitoring the quality of support (Rescue2-monitor): an open-label, prospective randomized, controlled, superiority clinical trial comparing hospital- versus home-based acute non-invasive ventilation for patients with hypercapnic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Trials ◽

10.1186/s13063-020-04672-w ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 21 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Keyword(s):

Chronic Obstructive ◽

Invasive Ventilation ◽

Open Label ◽

Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ◽

Free Survival ◽

Non Invasive ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Copd Patients ◽

Non Invasive Ventilation

AbstractChronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is expected to be the 3rd leading cause of death worldwide by 2020. Despite improvements in survival by using acute non-invasive ventilation (NIV) to treat patients with exacerbations of COPD complicated by acute hypercapnic respiratory failure (AHRF), these patients are at high risk of readmission and further life-threatening events, including death. Recent studies suggested that NIV at home can reduce readmissions, but in a small proportion of patients, and with a high level of expertise. Other studies, however, do not show any benefit of home NIV. This could be related to the fact that respiratory failure in patients with stable COPD and their response to mechanical ventilation are influenced by several pathophysiological factors which frequently coexist in the same patient to varying degrees. These pathophysiological factors might influence the success of home NIV in stable COPD, thus long-term NIV specifically adapted to a patient’s “phenotype” is likely to improve prognosis, reduce readmission to hospital, and prevent death. In view of this conundrum, Rescue2-monitor (R2M), an open-label, prospective randomized, controlled study performed in patients with hypercapnic COPD post-AHRF, will investigate the impact of the quality of nocturnal NIV on the readmission-free survival. The primary objective is to show that any of 3 home NIV strategies (“rescue,” “non-targeted,” and “targeted”) will improve readmission-free survival in comparison to no-home NIV. The “targeted” group of patients will receive a treatment with personalized (targeted) ventilation settings and extensive monitoring. Furthermore, the influence of comorbidities typical for COPD patients, such as cardiac insufficiency, OSA, or associated asthma, on ventilation outcomes will be taken into consideration and reasons for non-inclusion of patients will be recorded in order to evaluate the percentage of ventilated COPD patients that are screening failures. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03890224. Registered on March 26, 2019.

Download Full-text