Evidence-Based Mechanical Ventilatory Strategies in ARDS

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remains one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in critically ill patients despite advancements in the field. Mechanical ventilatory strategies are a vital component of ARDS management to prevent secondary lung injury and improve patient outcomes. Multiple strategies including utilization of low tidal volumes, targeting low plateau pressures to minimize barotrauma, using low FiO2 (fraction of inspired oxygen) to prevent injury related to oxygen free radicals, optimization of positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) to maintain or improve lung recruitment, and utilization of prone ventilation have been shown to decrease morbidity and mortality. The role of other mechanical ventilatory strategies like non-invasive ventilation, recruitment maneuvers, esophageal pressure monitoring, determination of optimal PEEP, and appropriate patient selection for extracorporeal support is not clear. In this article, we review evidence-based mechanical ventilatory strategies and ventilatory adjuncts for ARDS.

Patient effort at a glance

A: Patient with little effort. Top: Volume Controlled Ventilation: airway pressure in cmH2O in yellow, constant flow in L/min in pink. Middle: Pressure controlled ventilation: airway pressure in cmH2O in yellow, decelerating flow in L/min in pink. Bottom: Esophageal pressure in cmH2O. B: Patient with high effort. Top: Volume Controlled Ventilation: airway pressure with convex negative deflection during trigger and first half of inspiration (blue arrow). Middle: Pressure controlled ventilation: airway pressure with negative deflection during the trigger (yellow arrow) and slight convex deflection (green arrow), concave deflection in the flow (orange arrow). Bottom: Convex deflection in esophageal pressure (grey arrow).

Awake prone position reduces work of breathing in patients with COVID-19 ARDS supported by CPAP

Background The use of awake prone position concomitant to non-invasive mechanical ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) secondary to COVID-19 has shown to improve gas exchange, whereas its effect on the work of breathing remain unclear. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of awake prone position during helmet continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) ventilation on inspiratory effort, gas exchange and comfort of breathing. Methods Forty consecutive patients presenting with ARDS due to COVID-19 were prospectively enrolled. Gas exchange, esophageal pressure swing (ΔPes), dynamic transpulmonary pressure (dTPP), modified pressure time product (mPTP), work of breathing (WOB) and comfort of breathing, were recorded on supine position and after 3 h on prone position. Results The median applied PEEP with helmet CPAP was 10 [8–10] cmH2O. The PaO2/FiO2 was higher in prone compared to supine position (Supine: 166 [136–224] mmHg, Prone: 314 [232–398] mmHg, p < 0.001). Respiratory rate and minute ventilation decreased from supine to prone position from 20 [17–24] to 17 [15–19] b/min (p < 0.001) and from 8.6 [7.3–10.6] to 7.7 [6.6–8.6] L/min (p < 0.001), respectively. Prone position did not reduce ΔPes (Supine: − 7 [− 9 to − 5] cmH2O, Prone: − 6 [− 9 to − 5] cmH2O, p = 0.31) and dTPP (Supine: 17 [14–19] cmH2O, Prone: 16 [14–18] cmH2O, p = 0.34). Conversely, mPTP and WOB decreased from 152 [104–197] to 118 [90–150] cmH2O/min (p < 0.001) and from 146 [120–185] to 114 [95–151] cmH2O L/min (p < 0.001), respectively. Twenty-six (65%) patients experienced a reduction in WOB of more than 10%. The overall sensation of dyspnea was lower in prone position (p = 0.005). Conclusions Awake prone position with helmet CPAP enables a reduction in the work of breathing and an improvement in oxygenation in COVID-19-associated ARDS.

Esophageal Pressure and Clinical Assessments in the Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Patients with Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Disease

Laryngopharyngeal reflux disease (LPRD) might be associated with reflux symptoms, and its severity is correlated with the Reflux Symptoms Index. Diagnosis is often challenging because of a lack of accurate diagnostic tools. Although an association between LPRD and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) exists, the extent to which esophageal pressure changes in patients with LPRD with GERD has been unknown. Therefore, this study surveys the clinical assessments and extent of esophageal pressure changes in LRPD patients with various GERD severities, and compares esophageal sphincter pressures between ages, genders, and body mass index (BMI). This observational study assessed patients with LPRD and GERD. High-resolution esophageal manometry was used to gather data pertaining to the area pressure on the upper esophageal sphincter (UES) and lower esophageal sphincter (LES), and the correlation between such pressure and symptom severity was determined. We compared the esophageal pressure of different UES and LES levels in the following categories: gender, age, BMI, and GERD severity. We analyzed correlations between esophageal pressure and clinical assessments among 90 patients with throat globus with laryngitis with LPRD. LPRD was measured using laryngoscopy, and GERD was measured using esophagoscopy and 24 h PH monitoring. There were no significant differences in the clinical assessments among the four grades of GERD. The LPRD patients with serious GERD had a lower UES and LES pressure. The lowest pressure and longer duration of LES and UES were also observed among patients with LPRD of grade D GERD. No significant differences in UES and LES pressures among ages, genders, or BMIs were noted.

Refractory ineffective triggering during pressure support ventilation: effect of proportional assist ventilation with load-adjustable gain factors

Background Ineffective triggering is frequent during pressure support ventilation (PSV) and may persist despite ventilator adjustment, leading to refractory asynchrony. We aimed to assess the effect of proportional assist ventilation with load-adjustable gain factors (PAV+) on the occurrence of refractory ineffective triggering. Design Observational assessment followed by prospective cross-over physiological study. Setting Academic medical ICU. Patients Ineffective triggering was detected during PSV by a twice-daily inspection of the ventilator’s screen. The impact of pressure support level (PSL) adjustments on the occurrence of asynchrony was recorded. Patients experiencing refractory ineffective triggering, defined as persisting asynchrony at the lowest tolerated PSL, were included in the physiological study. Interventions Physiological study: Flow, airway, and esophageal pressures were continuously recorded during 10 min under PSV with the lowest tolerated PSL, and then under PAV+ with the gain adjusted to target a muscle pressure between 5 and 10 cmH2O. Measurements Primary endpoint was the comparison of asynchrony index between PSV and PAV+ after PSL and gain adjustments. Results Among 36 patients identified having ineffective triggering under PSV, 21 (58%) exhibited refractory ineffective triggering. The lowest tolerated PSL was higher in patients with refractory asynchrony as compared to patients with non-refractory ineffective triggering. Twelve out of the 21 patients with refractory ineffective triggering were included in the physiological study. The median lowest tolerated PSL was 17 cmH2O [12–18] with a PEEP of 7 cmH2O [5–8] and FiO2 of 40% [39–42]. The median gain during PAV+ was 73% [65–80]. The asynchrony index was significantly lower during PAV+ than PSV (2.7% [1.0–5.4] vs. 22.7% [10.3–40.1], p < 0.001) and consistently decreased in every patient with PAV+. Esophageal pressure–time product (PTPes) did not significantly differ between the two modes (107 cmH2O/s/min [79–131] under PSV vs. 149 cmH2O/s/min [129–170] under PAV+, p = 0.092), but the proportion of PTPes lost in ineffective triggering was significantly lower with PAV+ (2 cmH2O/s/min [1–6] vs. 8 cmH2O/s/min [3–30], p = 0.012). Conclusions Among patients with ineffective triggering under PSV, PSL adjustment failed to eliminate asynchrony in 58% of them (21 of 36 patients). In these patients with refractory ineffective triggering, switching from PSV to PAV+ significantly reduced or even suppressed the incidence of asynchrony.

Respiratory Drive in Patients with Sepsis and Septic Shock: Modulation by High-flow Nasal Cannula

Background Experimental and pilot clinical data suggest that spontaneously breathing patients with sepsis and septic shock may present increased respiratory drive and effort, even in the absence of pulmonary infection. The study hypothesis was that respiratory drive and effort may be increased in septic patients and correlated with extrapulmonary determinant and that high-flow nasal cannula may modulate drive and effort. Methods Twenty-five nonintubated patients with extrapulmonary sepsis or septic shock were enrolled. Each patient underwent three consecutive steps: low-flow oxygen at baseline, high-flow nasal cannula, and then low-flow oxygen again. Arterial blood gases, esophageal pressure, and electrical impedance tomography data were recorded toward the end of each step. Respiratory effort was measured as the negative swing of esophageal pressure (ΔPes); drive was quantified as the change in esophageal pressure during the first 500 ms from start of inspiration (P0.5). Dynamic lung compliance was calculated as the tidal volume measured by electrical impedance tomography, divided by ΔPes. The results are presented as medians [25th to 75th percentile]. Results Thirteen patients (52%) were in septic shock. The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was 5 [4 to 9]. During low-flow oxygen at baseline, respiratory drive and effort were elevated and significantly correlated with arterial lactate (r = 0.46, P = 0.034) and inversely with dynamic lung compliance (r = –0.735, P &lt; 0.001). Noninvasive support by high-flow nasal cannula induced a significant decrease of respiratory drive (P0.5: 6.0 [4.4 to 9.0] vs. 4.3 [3.5 to 6.6] vs. 6.6 [4.9 to 10.7] cm H2O, P &lt; 0.001) and effort (ΔPes: 8.0 [6.0 to 11.5] vs. 5.5 [4.5 to 8.0] vs. 7.5 [6.0 to 12.6] cm H2O, P &lt; 0.001). Oxygenation and arterial carbon dioxide levels remained stable during all study phases. Conclusions Patients with sepsis and septic shock of extrapulmonary origin present elevated respiratory drive and effort, which can be effectively reduced by high-flow nasal cannula. Editor’s Perspective What We Already Know about This Topic What This Article Tells Us That Is New

Accuracy of Algorithms and Visual Inspection for Detection of Trigger Asynchrony in Critical Patients : A Systematic Review

Objective. This study aimed to summarize the accuracy of the different methods for detecting trigger asynchrony at the bedside in mechanically ventilated patients. Method. A systematic review was conducted from 1990 to 2020 in PubMed, Lilacs, Scopus, and ScienceDirect databases. The reference list of the identified studies, reviews, and meta-analyses was also manually searched for relevant studies. The reference standards were esophageal pressure catheter and/or electrical activity of the diaphragm. Studies were assessed following the QUADAS-2 recommendations, while the review was prepared according to the PRISMA criteria. Results. One thousand one hundred and eleven studies were selected, and four were eligible for analysis. Esophageal pressure was the predominant reference standard, while visual inspection and algorithms/software comprised index tests. The trigger asynchrony, ineffective expiratory effort, double triggering, and reverse triggering were analyzed. Sensitivity and specificity ranged from 65.2% to 99% and 80% to 100%, respectively. Positive predictive values reached 80.3 to 100%, while the negative predictive values reached 92 to 100%. Accuracy could not be calculated for most studies. Conclusion. Algorithms/software validated directly or indirectly using reference standards present high sensitivity and specificity, with a diagnostic power similar to visual inspection of experts.

Novel method of transpulmonary pressure measurement with an air-filled esophageal catheter

Background There is a strong rationale for proposing transpulmonary pressure-guided protective ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome. The reference esophageal balloon catheter method requires complex in vivo calibration, expertise and specific material order. A simple, inexpensive, accurate and reproducible method of measuring esophageal pressure would greatly facilitate the measure of transpulmonary pressure to individualize protective ventilation in the intensive care unit. Results We propose an air-filled esophageal catheter method without balloon, using a disposable catheter that allows reproducible esophageal pressure measurements. We use a 49-cm-long 10 Fr thin suction catheter, positioned in the lower-third of the esophagus and connected to an air-filled disposable blood pressure transducer bound to the monitor and pressurized by an air-filled infusion bag. Only simple calibration by zeroing the transducer to atmospheric pressure and unit conversion from mmHg to cmH2O are required. We compared our method with the reference balloon catheter both ex vivo, using pressure chambers, and in vivo, in 15 consecutive mechanically ventilated patients. Esophageal-to-airway pressure change ratios during the dynamic occlusion test were close to one (1.03 ± 0.19 and 1.00 ± 0.16 in the controlled and assisted modes, respectively), validating the proper esophageal positioning. The Bland–Altman analysis revealed no bias of our method compared with the reference and good precision for inspiratory, expiratory and delta esophageal pressure measurements in both the controlled (largest bias −0.5 cmH2O [95% confidence interval: −0.9; −0.1] cmH2O; largest limits of agreement −3.5 to 2.5 cmH2O) and assisted modes (largest bias −0.3 [−2.6; 2.0] cmH2O). We observed a good repeatability (intra-observer, intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC: 0.89 [0.79; 0.96]) and reproducibility (inter-observer ICC: 0.89 [0.76; 0.96]) of esophageal measurements. The direct comparison with pleural pressure in two patients and spectral analysis by Fourier transform confirmed the reliability of the air-filled catheter-derived esophageal pressure as an accurate surrogate of pleural pressure. A calculator for transpulmonary pressures is available online. Conclusions We propose a simple, minimally invasive, inexpensive and reproducible method for esophageal pressure monitoring with an air-filled esophageal catheter without balloon. It holds the promise of widespread bedside use of transpulmonary pressure-guided protective ventilation in ICU patients.

Quantification of Airway Conductance from Non-invasive Ventilatory Drive in Patients with Sleep Apnea

Upper airway conductance, the ratio of inspiratory airflow to inspiratory effort, quantifies the degree of airway obstruction in hypopneas observed in sleep apnea. We evaluated the ratio of ventilation to non-invasive ventilatory drive as a surrogate of conductance. Further, we developed and tested a refinement of non-invasive drive to incorporate the interactions of inspiratory flow, pressure, and drive in order to better estimate conductance. Hypopneas were compiled from existing polysomnography studies with esophageal catheterization in 18 patients with known or suspected sleep apnea, totaling 1517 hypopneas during NREM sleep. For each hypopnea, reference-standard conductance was calculated as the ratio of peak inspiratory flow to esophageal pressure change during inspiration. Ventilatory drive was calculated using the algorithm developed by Terrill et al and then mathematically modified according to the presence or absence of flow limitation in order to non-invasively estimate esophageal pressure. The ratio of ventilation to ventilatory drive and the ratio of peak inspiratory flow to estimated esophageal pressure were each compared to the reference standard for all hypopneas and for median values from individual patients. Hypopnea ventilation:drive ratios were of limited correlation with the reference standard (R2 = 0.17, individual hypopneas; R2 = 0.03, median patient values). Modification of drive to estimated pressure yielded estimated conductance, which strongly correlated with reference standard conductance (R2 = 0.49, individual hypopneas; R2 = 0.77, median patient values­). We conclude that the severity of airway obstruction during hypopneas may be estimated from non-invasive drive by accounting for mechanical effects of flow on pressure.