scholarly journals A Lower Global Lung Ultrasound Score Is Associated with Higher Likelihood of Successful Extubation in Invasively Ventilated COVID-19 Patients

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charalampos Pierrakos ◽  
Arthur Lieveld ◽  
Luigi Pisani ◽  
Marry R. Smit ◽  
Micah Heldeweg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Prognostic Value ◽  
Lung Ultrasound ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Proportional Hazard ◽  
Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Pleural Line ◽  
Ultrasound Score ◽  
International Multicenter Study ◽  
International Multicenter

Lung ultrasound (LUS) can be used to assess loss of aeration, which is associated with outcome in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) presenting to the emergency department. We hypothesized that LUS scores are associated with outcome in critically ill COVID-19 patients receiving invasive ventilation. This retrospective international multicenter study evaluated patients with COVID-19–related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) with at least one LUS study within 5 days after invasive mechanical ventilation initiation. The global LUS score was calculated by summing the 12 regional scores (range 0–36). Pleural line abnormalities and subpleural consolidations were also scored. The outcomes were successful liberation from the ventilator and intensive care mortality within 28 days, analyzed with multistate, competing risk proportional hazard models. One hundred thirty-seven patients with COVID-19–related ARDS were included in our study. The global LUS score was associated with successful liberation from mechanical ventilation (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.91 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87–0.96; P = 0.0007) independently of the ARDS severity, but not with 28 days mortality (HR: 1.03; 95% CI 0.97–1.08; P = 0.36). Subpleural consolidation and pleural line abnormalities did not add to the prognostic value of the global LUS score. Examinations within 24 hours of intubation showed no prognostic value. To conclude, a lower global LUS score 24 hours after invasive ventilation initiation is associated with increased probability of liberation from the mechanical ventilator COVID–19 ARDS patients, independently of the ARDS severity.

scholarly journals Prognostic value of bedside lung ultrasound score in patients with COVID-19

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Li Ji ◽  
Chunyan Cao ◽  
Ying Gao ◽  
Wen Zhang ◽  
Yuji Xie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prognostic Value ◽  
Troponin I ◽  
Lung Ultrasound ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Continuous Variable ◽  
Adverse Outcomes ◽  
Cox Models ◽  
Pleural Line ◽  
Specificity And Sensitivity ◽  
B Lines

Abstract Background: Bedside lung ultrasound (LUS) has emerged as a useful and noninvasive tool to detect lung involvement and monitor changes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the clinical significance of the LUS score in patients with COVID-19 remains unknown. We aimed to investigate the prognostic value of the LUS score in patients with COVID-19.Methods: The LUS protocol consisted of 12 scanning zones and was performed in 280 consecutive patients with COVID-19. The LUS score based on B-lines, lung consolidation and pleural line abnormalities was evaluated.Results: Patients in the highest LUS score group were more likely to have a lower lymphocyte percentage (LYM%); higher levels of D-dimer, C-reactive protein, hypersensitive troponin I and creatine kinase muscle-brain; more invasive mechanical ventilation therapy; higher incidence of ARDS; and higher mortality than patients in the lowest LUS score group. After a median follow-up of 14 days [IQR, 10-20 days], 37 patients developed ARDS, and 13 died. Patients with adverse outcomes presented a higher rate of bilateral involvement; more involved zones and B-lines, pleural line abnormalities and consolidation; and a higher LUS score than event-free survivors. The Cox models adding the LUS score as a continuous variable (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.05, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 1.02～1.08; P < 0.001; Akaike Information Criterion [AIC] =272; C-index = 0.903) or as a categorical variable (HR: 10.76, 95% CI: 2.75～42.05; P = 0.001; AIC =272; C-index = 0.902) were found to predict poor outcomes more accurately than the basic model (AIC =286; C-index = 0.866). An LUS score cut-off >12 predicted adverse outcomes with a specificity and sensitivity of 90.5% and 91.9%, respectively.Conclusions: The LUS score devised by our group performs well at predicting adverse outcomes in patients with COVID-19 and is important for risk stratification in COVID-19 patients.

scholarly journals Prognostic value of bedside lung ultrasound score in patients with COVID-19

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Li Ji ◽  
Chunyan Cao ◽  
Ying Gao ◽  
Wen Zhang ◽  
Yuji Xie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prognostic Value ◽  
Troponin I ◽  
Lung Ultrasound ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Continuous Variable ◽  
Adverse Outcomes ◽  
Cox Models ◽  
Pleural Line ◽  
Specificity And Sensitivity ◽  
B Lines

Abstract BackgroundBedside lung ultrasound (LUS) has emerged as a useful and noninvasive tool to detect lung involvement and monitor changes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the clinical significance of the LUS score in patients with COVID-19 remains unknown. We aimed to investigate the prognostic value of the LUS score in patients with COVID-19.MethodsThe LUS protocol consisted of 12 scanning zones and was performed in 280 consecutive patients with COVID-19. The LUS score based on B-lines, lung consolidation and pleural line abnormalities was evaluated.ResultsPatients in the highest LUS score group were more likely to have a lower lymphocyte percentage (LYM%); higher levels of D-dimer, C-reactive protein, hypersensitive troponin I and creatine kinase muscle-brain; more invasive mechanical ventilation therapy; higher incidence of ARDS; and higher mortality than patients in the lowest LUS score group. After a median follow-up of 14 days [IQR, 10-20 days], 37 patients developed ARDS, and 13 died. Patients with adverse outcomes presented a higher rate of bilateral involvement; more involved zones and B-lines, pleural line abnormalities and consolidation; and a higher LUS score than event-free survivors. The Cox models adding the LUS score as a continuous variable ( hazard ratio [HR] : 1.05, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 1.02～1.08; P < 0.001; Akaike Information Criterion [AIC] =272; C-index = 0.903) or as a categorical variable (HR: 10.76, 95% CI: 2.75～42.05; P = 0.001; AIC =272; C-index = 0.902) were found to predict poor outcomes more accurately than the basic model ( AIC =286; C-index = 0. 866). An LUS score cut-off >12 predicted adverse outcomes with a specificity and sensitivity of 90.5% and 91.9%, respectively.ConclusionsThe LUS score is a powerful predictor of adverse outcomes in patients with COVID-19 and is important for risk stratification in COVID-19 patients.

scholarly journals Prognostic value of bedside lung ultrasound score in patients with COVID-19

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Li Ji ◽  
Chunyan Cao ◽  
Ying Gao ◽  
Wen Zhang ◽  
Yuji Xie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prognostic Value ◽  
Troponin I ◽  
Lung Ultrasound ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Continuous Variable ◽  
Adverse Outcomes ◽  
Cox Models ◽  
Pleural Line ◽  
Specificity And Sensitivity ◽  
B Lines

Abstract Background: Bedside lung ultrasound (LUS) has emerged as a useful and noninvasive tool to detect lung involvement and monitor changes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the clinical significance of the LUS score in patients with COVID-19 remains unknown. We aimed to investigate the prognostic value of the LUS score in patients with COVID-19.Methods: The LUS protocol consisted of 12 scanning zones and was performed in 280 consecutive patients with COVID-19. The LUS score based on B-lines, lung consolidation and pleural line abnormalities was evaluated.Results: The median time from admission to LUS examinations was 7 days (interquartile range [IQR] 3-10). Patients in the highest LUS score group were more likely to have a lower lymphocyte percentage (LYM%); higher levels of D-dimer, C-reactive protein, hypersensitive troponin I and creatine kinase muscle-brain; more invasive mechanical ventilation therapy; higher incidence of ARDS; and higher mortality than patients in the lowest LUS score group. After a median follow-up of 14 days [IQR, 10-20 days], 37 patients developed ARDS, and 13 died. Patients with adverse outcomes presented a higher rate of bilateral involvement; more involved zones and B-lines, pleural line abnormalities and consolidation; and a higher LUS score than event-free survivors. The Cox models adding the LUS score as a continuous variable (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.05, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 1.02～1.08; P < 0.001; Akaike Information Criterion [AIC] =272; C-index = 0.903) or as a categorical variable (HR: 10.76, 95% CI: 2.75～42.05; P = 0.001; AIC =272; C-index = 0.902) were found to predict poor outcomes more accurately than the basic model (AIC =286; C-index = 0.866). An LUS score cut-off >12 predicted adverse outcomes with a specificity and sensitivity of 90.5% and 91.9%, respectively.Conclusions: The LUS score devised by our group performs well at predicting adverse outcomes in patients with COVID-19 and is important for risk stratification in COVID-19 patients.

scholarly journals Prognostic value of bedside lung ultrasound score in patients with COVID-19

Critical Care ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Li Ji ◽  
Chunyan Cao ◽  
Ying Gao ◽  
Wen Zhang ◽  
Yuji Xie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prognostic Value ◽  
Troponin I ◽  
Lung Ultrasound ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Continuous Variable ◽  
Adverse Outcomes ◽  
Cox Models ◽  
Pleural Line ◽  
Specificity And Sensitivity ◽  
B Lines

Abstract Background Bedside lung ultrasound (LUS) has emerged as a useful and non-invasive tool to detect lung involvement and monitor changes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the clinical significance of the LUS score in patients with COVID-19 remains unknown. We aimed to investigate the prognostic value of the LUS score in patients with COVID-19. Method The LUS protocol consisted of 12 scanning zones and was performed in 280 consecutive patients with COVID-19. The LUS score based on B-lines, lung consolidation and pleural line abnormalities was evaluated. Results The median time from admission to LUS examinations was 7 days (interquartile range [IQR] 3–10). Patients in the highest LUS score group were more likely to have a lower lymphocyte percentage (LYM%); higher levels of D-dimer, C-reactive protein, hypersensitive troponin I and creatine kinase muscle-brain; more invasive mechanical ventilation therapy; higher incidence of ARDS; and higher mortality than patients in the lowest LUS score group. After a median follow-up of 14 days [IQR, 10–20 days], 37 patients developed ARDS, and 13 died. Patients with adverse outcomes presented a higher rate of bilateral involvement; more involved zones and B-lines, pleural line abnormalities and consolidation; and a higher LUS score than event-free survivors. The Cox models adding the LUS score as a continuous variable (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.05, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.02 ~ 1.08; P < 0.001; Akaike information criterion [AIC] = 272; C-index = 0.903) or as a categorical variable (HR 10.76, 95% CI 2.75 ~ 42.05; P = 0.001; AIC = 272; C-index = 0.902) were found to predict poor outcomes more accurately than the basic model (AIC = 286; C-index = 0.866). An LUS score cut-off > 12 predicted adverse outcomes with a specificity and sensitivity of 90.5% and 91.9%, respectively. Conclusions The LUS score devised by our group performs well at predicting adverse outcomes in patients with COVID-19 and is important for risk stratification in COVID-19 patients.

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

Trials ◽  
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, .

scholarly journals Protocolized Post-Extubation Respiratory Support to prevent reintubation: protocol and statistical analysis plan for a clinical trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. e030476 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Dale Casey ◽  
Erin R Vaughan ◽  
Bradley D Lloyd ◽  
Peter A Bilas ◽  
Eric J Hall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Respiratory Support ◽  
Invasive Ventilation ◽  
High Flow Nasal Cannula ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Non Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Risk Patients

IntroductionFollowing extubation from invasive mechanical ventilation, nearly one in seven critically ill adults requires reintubation. Reintubation is independently associated with increased mortality. Postextubation respiratory support (non-invasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula applied at the time of extubation) has been reported in small-to-moderate-sized trials to reduce reintubation rates among hypercapnic patients, high-risk patients without hypercapnia and low-risk patients without hypercapnia. It is unknown whether protocolised provision of postextubation respiratory support to every patient undergoing extubation would reduce the overall reintubation rate, compared with usual care.Methods and analysisThe Protocolized Post-Extubation Respiratory Support (PROPER) trial is a pragmatic, cluster cross-over trial being conducted between 1 October 2017 and 31 March 2019 in the medical intensive care unit of Vanderbilt University Medical Center. PROPER compares usual care versus protocolized post-extubation respiratory support (a respiratory therapist-driven protocol that advises the provision of non-invasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula based on patient characteristics). For the duration of the trial, the unit is divided into two clusters. One cluster receives protocolised support and the other receives usual care. Each cluster crosses over between treatment group assignments every 3 months. All adults undergoing extubation from invasive mechanical ventilation are enrolled except those who received less than 12 hours of mechanical ventilation, have ‘Do Not Intubate’ orders, or have been previously reintubated during the hospitalisation. The anticipated enrolment is approximately 630 patients. The primary outcome is reintubation within 96 hours of extubation.Ethics and disseminationThe trial was approved by the Vanderbilt Institutional Review Board. The results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at one or more scientific conferences.Trial registration numberNCT03288311.

scholarly journals Italian Society of Anesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation, and Intensive Care expert consensus statement on the use of lung ultrasound in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (ITACO)

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Luigi Vetrugno ◽  
Francesco Mojoli ◽  
Andrea Cortegiani ◽  
Elena Giovanna Bignami ◽  
Mariachiara Ippolito ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Lung Ultrasound ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Italian Society ◽  
Expert Consensus ◽  
Consensus Statements

Abstract Background To produce statements based on the available evidence and an expert consensus (as members of the Lung Ultrasound Working Group of the Italian Society of Analgesia, Anesthesia, Resuscitation, and Intensive Care, SIAARTI) on the use of lung ultrasound for the management of patients with COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit. Methods A modified Delphi method was applied by a panel of anesthesiologists and intensive care physicians expert in the use of lung ultrasound in COVID-19 intensive critically ill patients to reach a consensus on ten clinical questions concerning the role of lung ultrasound in the following: COVID-19 diagnosis and monitoring (with and without invasive mechanical ventilation), positive end expiratory pressure titration, the use of prone position, the early diagnosis of pneumothorax- or ventilator-associated pneumonia, the process of weaning from invasive mechanical ventilation, and the need for radiologic chest imaging. Results A total of 20 statements were produced by the panel. Agreement was reached on 18 out of 20 statements (scoring 7–9; “appropriate”) in the first round of voting, while 2 statements required a second round for agreement to be reached. At the end of the two Delphi rounds, the median score for the 20 statements was 8.5 [IQR 8.9], and the agreement percentage was 100%. Conclusion The Lung Ultrasound Working Group of the Italian Society of Analgesia, Anesthesia, Resuscitation, and Intensive Care produced 20 consensus statements on the use of lung ultrasound in COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU. This expert consensus strongly suggests integrating lung ultrasound findings in the clinical management of critically ill COVID-19 patients.

scholarly journals ASPECTS OF INVASIVE MECHANICAL VENTILATION IN PATIENTS WITH ARDS CAUSED BY COVID-19

2021 ◽  
pp. 9-16
Author(s):  
O. A. Loskutov ◽  
I. A. Kuchynska ◽  
S. M. Nedashkivskyi ◽  
O. S. Demchenko
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Multiorgan Failure ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Severe Pneumonia ◽  
Ideal Body Weight ◽  
Plateau Pressure ◽  
Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Number Of Publications ◽  
Main Components

Mortality among patients with severe pneumonia and / or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to COVID-19 infection, who underwent mechanical ventilation (MV), is characterized by a fairly high frequency. However, despite the large number of patients receiving appropriate treatment, the question of choosing the optimal ventilation parameters remains poorly understood. In our article, we reviewed the available literature data on the indications for mechanical ventilation, parameters of MV, the need for prone-positioning of patients with ARDS caused by COVID-19 infection in intensive care units to identify unresolved issues.Despite the large number of publications about respiratory support in patients with severe coronavirus infection, there are only general principles regarding the indications for switching to invasive ventilation. Most authors identified the following clinical situations: progression of hypoxemia and / or respiratory failure but with constant oxygen support with increasing percentage of oxygen in the respiratory mixture, use of high-flow cannula or non-invasive ventilation for 1 hour without improvement; persistent hypercapnia, multiorgan failure, coma, high risk of aspiration, hemodynamic instability.According to most of the studies analyzed, the main components of the ventilation strategy should be based on the principles of pulmonary protective ventilation and include the use of low tidal volumes (Vt = 4-8 ml / kg of ideal body weight) and ventilation with plateau pressure Pplat <30 cm H2O (plateau pressure - air pressure measured after an inspiratory pause of 0.5 s). At the same time, many authors recommend using prone position and high levels of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) compared to low levels in patients with ARDS on the background of COVID-19.The approach to invasive mechanical ventilation in ARDS caused by SARS-CoV-2 still requires further research and answers to a number of questions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document