Maintenance of low driving pressure in patients with early acute respiratory distress syndrome significantly affects outcomes

Background Driving pressure (∆P) is an important factor that predicts mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We test the hypothesis that serial changes in daily ΔP rather than Day 1 ΔP would better predict outcomes of patients with ARDS. Methods This retrospective cohort study enrolled patients admitted to five intensive care units (ICUs) at a medical center in Taiwan between March 2009 and January 2018 who met the criteria for ARDS and received the lung-protective ventilation strategy. ∆P was recorded daily for 3 consecutive days after the diagnosis of ARDS, and its correlation with 60-day survival was analyzed. Results A total of 224 patients were enrolled in the final analysis. The overall ICU and 60-day survival rates were 52.7% and 47.3%, respectively. ∆P on Days 1, 2, and 3 was significantly lower in the survival group than in the nonsurvival group (13.8 ± 3.4 vs. 14.8 ± 3.7, p = 0.0322, 14 ± 3.2 vs. 15 ± 3.5, p = 0.0194, 13.6 ± 3.2 vs. 15.1 ± 3.4, p = 0.0014, respectively). The patients were divided into four groups according to the daily changes in ∆P, namely, the low ∆P group (Day 1 ∆P < 14 cmH2O and Day 3 ∆P < 14 cmH2O), decrement group (Day 1 ∆P ≥ 14 cmH2O and Day 3 ∆P < 14 cmH2O), high ∆P group (Day 1 ∆P ≥ 14 cmH2O and Day 3 ∆P ≥ 14 cmH2O), and increment group (Day 1 ∆P < 14 cmH2O and Day 3 ∆P ≥ 14 cmH2O). The 60-day survival significantly differed among the four groups (log-rank test, p = 0.0271). Compared with the low ΔP group, patients in the decrement group did not have lower 60-day survival (adjusted hazard ratio 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.31–1.68; p = 0.4448), while patients in the increment group had significantly lower 60-day survival (adjusted hazard ratio 1.96; 95% CI 1.11–3.44; p = 0.0198). Conclusions Daily ∆P remains an important predicting factor for survival in patients with ARDS. Serial changes in daily ΔP might be more informative than a single Day 1 ΔP value in predicting survival of patients with ARDS.

Progress in Clinical Application of Positive End-Expiratory Pressure

In the surgery patient under general anesthesia doesn’t breathe spontaneously, and lung movement is completely dependent on the mechanical ventilation of the anesthesia machine. In order to achieve effective and safe mechanical ventilation of the patient’s lungs during the operation, the concept of lung protective ventilation strategy (LPVS) was proposed, that is, the use of a low tidal volume and an appropriate level of positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) to reduce alveolar overexpansion and prevent alveolar collapse. In the past, PEEP was an important measure to treat acute lung injury(ALI) or acute respiratory distress syndrome(ARDS) by improving oxygenation and reducing pulmonary edema. Subsequent studies found that PEEP not only be used to treat patients with ALI or ARDS, but also can reduce the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications(PPCs) in some thoracoabdominal operations. Moreover, PEEP can prevent atelectasis during and after surgery in patients undergoing thoracic and abdominal surgery under general anesthesia, and decrease the incidence of postoperative infection. However, PEEP can affect venous return by increasing intrathoracic pressure, thereby causing changes in heart function and hemodynamics, and indirectly affecting intracranial pressure and renal function. Therefore, with the widespread clinical application of PEEP, more and more people are starting to focus on how to choose the appropriate PEEP. This article reviews the research progress of PEEP selection method, the influence of PEEP on physiological function and the clinical application of PEEP during mechanical ventilation.

Protective mechanical ventilation with optimal PEEP during RARP improves oxygenation and pulmonary indexes

Background This trial aimed to evaluate the effects of a protective ventilation strategy on oxygenation/pulmonary indexes in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in the steep Trendelenburg position. Methods In phase 1, the most optimal positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) was determined in 25 patients at 11 cmH2O. In phase 2, 64 patients were randomized to the traditional ventilation group with tidal volume (VT) of 9 ml/kg of predicted body weight (PBW) and the protective ventilation group with VT of 7 ml/kg of PBW with optimal PEEP and recruitment maneuvers (RMs). The primary endpoint was the intraoperative and postoperative PaO2/FiO2. The secondary endpoints were the PaCO2, SpO2, modified clinical pulmonary infection score (mCPIS), and the rate of complications in the postoperative period. Results Compared with controls, PaO2/FiO2 in the protective group increased after the second RM (P=0.018), and the difference remained until postoperative day 3 (P=0.043). PaCO2 showed transient accumulation in the protective group after the first RM (T2), but this phenomenon disappeared with time. SpO2 in the protective group was significantly higher during the first three postoperative days. Lung compliance was significantly improved after the second RM in the protective group (P=0.025). The mCPIS was lower in the protective group on postoperative day 3 (0.59 (1.09) vs. 1.46 (1.27), P=0.010). Conclusion A protective ventilation strategy with lower VT combined with optimal PEEP and RMs could improve oxygenation and reduce mCPIS in patients undergoing RARP. Trial registration ChiCTR ChiCTR1800015626. Registered on 12 April 2018.

Protective PEEP and Lung Capacity May Be Determined by a Rapid PEEP-step Procedure

Background: A protective ventilation strategy should be based on assessment of lung mechanics and transpulmonary pressure, as this is the pressure that directly “hits” the lung. Esophageal pressure has been used for this purpose but has not gained widespread clinical acceptance. Instead, respiratory system mechanics and airway driving pressure have been used as surrogate measures. We have shown that the lung P/V curve coincides with the line connecting the end-expiratory airway P/V points of a PEEP trial. Consequently, transpulmonary pressure increases as much as PEEP is increased. If the change in end-expiratory lung volume (ΔEELV) is determined, lung compliance (CL) can be determined as ΔEELV/ΔPEEP and ΔPTP as tidal volume times ΔPEEP/ΔEELV. Methods: In ten patients with acute respiratory failure, ΔEELV was measured during each 4 cmH2O PEEP-step from 0 to 16 cmH2O and CL for each PEEP interval calculated as ΔEELV/ΔPEEP giving a lung P/V curve for the whole PEEP trial. Results: Lung P/V curves showed a marked individual variation with an overall lung compliance of 43–143 ml/cmH2O (total inspiratory volume divided by end-inspiratory transpulmonary plateau pressure at PEEP 16 cmH2O). The two patients with lowest lung compliance were non-responders to PEEP with decreasing lung compliance at high PEEP levels, indicating over-distension. Patients with higher lung compliance had a positive response to PEEP with successively higher lung compliance when increasing PEEP. A two-step PEEP procedure starting from a clinical PEEP level of 8 cmH2O gave almost identical lung P/V curves as the four PEEP-step procedure. The ratio of airway driving pressure (ΔPAW) to transpulmonary driving pressure (ΔPTP/ΔPAW) varied between patients and changed with PEEP, reducing the value of ΔPAW as surrogate for ΔPTP in individual patients. Conclusion: Separation of lung and chest wall mechanics can be achieved without esophageal pressure measurements if ΔEELV is determined when PEEP is changed . Only a two-step PEEP procedure is required for obtaining a lung P/V curve from baseline clinical PEEP to end-inspiration at the highest PEEP level, which can be used to determine the PEEP level where transpulmonary driving pressure is lowest and possibly least injurious for any given tidal volume.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04484727. Registered 24 July 2020 – Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04484727?term=Lindgren%2C+Sophie&cntry=SE&draw=2&rank=1

Favourable outcome after prolonged veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) support for Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia in a renal transplant recipient

A 27-year-old man, with a history of renal transplantation, presented with acute kidney failure and Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia. The patient developed severe acute respiratory failure and required support by veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for a total of 59 days. During this period, the patient had extremely low tidal volumes using a lung protective ventilation strategy and intermittent prone positioning was used to optimise oxygenation. There was full recovery of pulmonary and partial recovery of renal function.

Knowledge translation tools to guide care of non-intubated patients with acute respiratory illness during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Providing optimal care to patients with acute respiratory illness while preventing hospital transmission of COVID-19 is of paramount importance during the pandemic; the challenge lies in achieving both goals simultaneously. Controversy exists regarding the role of early intubation versus use of non-invasive respiratory support measures to avoid intubation. This review summarizes available evidence and provides a clinical decision algorithm with risk mitigation techniques to guide clinicians in care of the hypoxemic, non-intubated, patient during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although aerosolization of droplets may occur with aerosol-generating medical procedures (AGMP), including high flow nasal oxygen and non-invasive ventilation, the risk of using these AGMP is outweighed by the benefit in carefully selected patients, particularly if care is taken to mitigate risk of viral transmission. Non-invasive support measures should not be denied for conditions where previously proven effective and may be used even while there is suspicion of COVID-19 infection. Patients with de novo acute respiratory illness with suspected/confirmed COVID-19 may also benefit. These techniques may improve oxygenation sufficiently to allow some patients to avoid intubation; however, patients must be carefully monitored for signs of increased work of breathing. Patients showing signs of clinical deterioration or high work of breathing not alleviated by non-invasive support should proceed promptly to intubation and invasive lung protective ventilation strategy. With adherence to these principles, risk of viral spread can be minimized.

Brazilian guidelines for the management of brain-dead potential organ donors. The task force of the AMIB, ABTO, BRICNet, and the General Coordination of the National Transplant System

Objective To contribute to updating the recommendations for brain-dead potential organ donor management. Method A group of 27 experts, including intensivists, transplant coordinators, transplant surgeons, and epidemiologists, joined a task force formed by the General Coordination Office of the National Transplant System/Brazilian Ministry of Health (CGSNT-MS), the Brazilian Association of Intensive Care Medicine (AMIB), the Brazilian Association of Organ Transplantation (ABTO), and the Brazilian Research in Intensive Care Network (BRICNet). The questions were developed within the scope of the 2011 Brazilian Guidelines for Management of Adult Potential Multiple-Organ Deceased Donors. The topics were divided into mechanical ventilation, hemodynamic support, endocrine-metabolic management, infection, body temperature, blood transfusion, and use of checklists. The outcomes considered for decision-making were cardiac arrest, number of organs recovered or transplanted per donor, and graft function/survival. Rapid systematic reviews were conducted, and the quality of evidence of the recommendations was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Two expert panels were held in November 2016 and February 2017 to classify the recommendations. A systematic review update was performed in June 2020, and the recommendations were reviewed through a Delphi process with the panelists between June and July 2020. Results A total of 19 recommendations were drawn from the expert panel. Of these, 7 were classified as strong (lung-protective ventilation strategy, vasopressors and combining arginine vasopressin to control blood pressure, antidiuretic hormones to control polyuria, serum potassium and magnesium control, and antibiotic use), 11 as weak (alveolar recruitment maneuvers, low-dose dopamine, low-dose corticosteroids, thyroid hormones, glycemic and serum sodium control, nutritional support, body temperature control or hypothermia, red blood cell transfusion, and goal-directed protocols), and 1 was considered a good clinical practice (volemic expansion). Conclusion Despite the agreement among panel members on most recommendations, the grade of recommendation was mostly weak. The observed lack of robust evidence on the topic highlights the importance of the present guideline to improve the management of brain-dead potential organ donors.