Dataset Information

Targeted lateral positioning decreases lung collapse and overdistension in COVID-19-associated ARDS.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Among the challenges for personalizing the management of mechanically ventilated patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19)-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are the effects of different positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) levels and body positions in regional lung mechanics. Right-left lung aeration asymmetry and poorly recruitable lungs with increased recruitability with alternating body position between supine and prone have been reported. However, real-time effects of changing body position and PEEP on regional overdistension and collapse, in individual patients, remain largely unknown and not timely monitored. The aim of this study was to individualize PEEP and body positioning in order to reduce the mechanisms of ventilator-induced lung injury: collapse and overdistension.

Methods

We here report a series of five consecutive mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS in which sixteen decremental PEEP titrations were performed in the first days of mechanical ventilation (8 titration pairs: supine position immediately followed by 30° targeted lateral position). The choice of lateral tilt was based on X-Ray. This targeted lateral position strategy was defined by selecting the less aerated lung to be positioned up and the more aerated lung to be positioned down. For each PEEP level, global and regional collapse and overdistension maps and percentages were measured by electrical impedance tomography. Additionally, we present the incidence of lateral asymmetry in a cohort of forty-four patients.

Results

The targeted lateral position strategy resulted in significantly smaller amounts of overdistension and collapse when compared with the supine one: less collapse along the PEEP titration was found within the left lung in targeted lateral (P = 0.014); and less overdistension along the PEEP titration was found within the right lung in targeted lateral (P = 0.005). Regarding collapse within the right lung and overdistension within the left lung: no differences were found for position. In the cohort of forty-four patients, ventilation inequality of > 65/35% was observed in 15% of cases.

Conclusions

Targeted lateral positioning with bedside personalized PEEP provided a selective attenuation of overdistension and collapse in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS and right-left lung aeration/ventilation asymmetry.

Trial registration

Trial registration number: NCT04460859.

SUBMITTER: Mlcek M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8065309 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundA sequential change in body position from supine-to-both lateral positions under constant ventilatory settings could be used as a postural recruitment maneuver in case of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), provided that sufficient positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) prevents derecruitment. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility and physiological effects of a sequential postural recruitment maneuver in early mechanically ventilated COVID-19 ARDS patients.MethodsA cohort of 15 patients receiving lung-protective mechanical ventilation in volume-controlled with PEEP based on recruitability were prospectively enrolled and evaluated in five sequentially applied positions for 30 min each: Supine-baseline; Lateral-1st side; 2nd Supine; Lateral-2nd side; Supine-final. PEEP level was selected using the recruitment-to-inflation ratio (R/I ratio) based on which patients received PEEP 12 cmH2O for R/I ratio ≤ 0.5 or PEEP 15 cmH2O for R/I ratio > 0.5. At the end of each period, we measured respiratory mechanics, arterial blood gases, lung ultrasound aeration, end-expiratory lung impedance (EELI), and regional distribution of ventilation and perfusion using electric impedance tomography (EIT).ResultsComparing supine baseline and final, respiratory compliance (29 ± 9 vs 32 ± 8 mL/cmH2O; p < 0.01) and PaO2/FIO2 ratio (138 ± 36 vs 164 ± 46 mmHg; p < 0.01) increased, while driving pressure (13 ± 2 vs 11 ± 2 cmH2O; p < 0.01) and lung ultrasound consolidation score decreased [5 (4-5) vs 2 (1-4); p < 0.01]. EELI decreased ventrally (218 ± 205 mL; p < 0.01) and increased dorsally (192 ± 475 mL; p = 0.02), while regional compliance increased in both ventral (11.5 ± 0.7 vs 12.9 ± 0.8 mL/cmH2O; p < 0.01) and dorsal regions (17.1 ± 1.8 vs 18.8 ± 1.8 mL/cmH2O; p < 0.01). Dorsal distribution of perfusion increased (64.8 ± 7.3% vs 66.3 ± 7.2%; p = 0.01).ConclusionsWithout increasing airway pressure, a sequential postural recruitment maneuver improves global and regional respiratory mechanics and gas exchange along with a redistribution of EELI from ventral to dorsal lung areas and less consolidation. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04475068. Registered 17 July 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04475068.

Project description:BackgroundProne positioning is recommended for patients with moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) receiving mechanical ventilation. While the debate continues as to whether COVID-19 ARDS is clinically different from non-COVID ARDS, there is little data on whether the physiological effects of prone positioning differ between the two conditions. We aimed to compare the physiological effect of prone positioning between patients with COVID-19 ARDS and those with non-COVID ARDS.MethodsWe retrospectively compared 23 patients with COVID-19 ARDS and 145 patients with non-COVID ARDS treated using prone positioning while on mechanical ventilation. Changes in PaO2/FiO2 ratio and static respiratory system compliance (Crs) after the first session of prone positioning were compared between the two groups: first, using all patients with non-COVID ARDS, and second, using subgroups of patients with non-COVID ARDS matched 1:1 with patients with COVID-19 ARDS for baseline PaO2/FiO2 ratio and static Crs. We also evaluated whether the response to the first prone positioning session was associated with the clinical outcome.ResultsWhen compared with the entire group of patients with non-COVID ARDS, patients with COVID-19 ARDS showed more pronounced improvement in PaO2/FiO2 ratio [adjusted difference 39.3 (95% CI 5.2-73.5) mmHg] and static Crs [adjusted difference 3.4 (95% CI 1.1-5.6) mL/cmH2O]. However, these between-group differences were not significant when the matched samples (either PaO2/FiO2-matched or compliance-matched) were analyzed. Patients who successfully discontinued mechanical ventilation showed more remarkable improvement in PaO2/FiO2 ratio [median 112 (IQR 85-144) vs. 35 (IQR 6-52) mmHg, P = 0.003] and static compliance [median 5.7 (IQR 3.3-7.7) vs. - 1.0 (IQR - 3.7-3.0) mL/cmH2O, P = 0.006] after prone positioning compared with patients who did not. The association between oxygenation and Crs responses to prone positioning and clinical outcome was also evident in the adjusted competing risk regression.ConclusionsIn patients with COVID-19 ARDS, prone positioning was as effective in improving respiratory physiology as in patients with non-COVID ARDS. Thus, it should be actively considered as a therapeutic option. The physiological response to the first session of prone positioning was predictive of the clinical outcome of patients with COVID-19 ARDS.

Project description:BackgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, many more patients were turned prone than before, resulting in a considerable increase in workload. Whether extending duration of prone position may be beneficial has received little attention. We report here benefits and detriments of a strategy of extended prone positioning duration for COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).MethodsA eetrospective, monocentric, study was performed on intensive care unit patients with COVID-19-related ARDS who required tracheal intubation and who have been treated with at least one session of prone position of duration greater or equal to 24 h. When prone positioning sessions were initiated, patients were kept prone for a period that covered two nights. Data regarding the incidence of pressure injury and ventilation parameters were collected retrospectively on medical and nurse files of charts. The primary outcome was the occurrence of pressure injury of stage ≥ II during the ICU stay.ResultsFor the 81 patients included, the median duration of prone positioning sessions was 39 h [interquartile range (IQR) 34-42]. The cumulated incidence of stage ≥ II pressure injuries was 26% [95% CI 17-37] and 2.5% [95% CI 0.3-8.8] for stages III/IV pressure injuries. Patients were submitted to a median of 2 sessions [IQR 1-4] and for 213 (94%) prone positioning sessions, patients were turned over to supine position during daytime, i.e., between 9 AM and 6 PM. This increased duration was associated with additional increase in oxygenation after 16 h with the PaO2/FiO2 ratio increasing from 150 mmHg [IQR 121-196] at H+ 16 to 162 mmHg [IQR 124-221] before being turned back to supine (p = 0.017).ConclusionIn patients with extended duration of prone position up to 39 h, cumulative incidence for stage ≥ II pressure injuries was 26%, with 25%, 2.5%, and 0% for stage II, III, and IV, respectively. Oxygenation continued to increase significantly beyond the standard 16-h duration. Our results may have significant impact on intensive care unit staffing and patients' respiratory conditions.Trial registrationInstitutional review board 00006477 of HUPNVS, Université Paris Cité, APHP, with the reference: CER-2021-102, obtained on October 11th 2021. Registered at Clinicaltrials (NCT05124197).

Project description:BackgroundIn acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), extravascular lung water index (EVLWi) and pulmonary vascular permeability index (PVPI) measured by transpulmonary thermodilution reflect the degree of lung injury. Whether EVLWi and PVPI are different between non-COVID-19 ARDS and the ARDS due to COVID-19 has never been reported. We aimed at comparing EVLWi, PVPI, respiratory mechanics and hemodynamics in patients with COVID-19 ARDS vs. ARDS of other origin.MethodsBetween March and October 2020, in an observational study conducted in intensive care units from three university hospitals, 60 patients with COVID-19-related ARDS monitored by transpulmonary thermodilution were compared to the 60 consecutive non-COVID-19 ARDS admitted immediately before the COVID-19 outbreak between December 2018 and February 2020.ResultsDriving pressure was similar between patients with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS, at baseline as well as during the study period. Compared to patients without COVID-19, those with COVID-19 exhibited higher EVLWi, both at the baseline (17 (14-21) vs. 15 (11-19) mL/kg, respectively, p = 0.03) and at the time of its maximal value (24 (18-27) vs. 21 (15-24) mL/kg, respectively, p = 0.01). Similar results were observed for PVPI. In COVID-19 patients, the worst ratio between arterial oxygen partial pressure over oxygen inspired fraction was lower (81 (70-109) vs. 100 (80-124) mmHg, respectively, p = 0.02) and prone positioning and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) were more frequently used than in patients without COVID-19. COVID-19 patients had lower maximal lactate level and maximal norepinephrine dose than patients without COVID-19. Day-60 mortality was similar between groups (57% vs. 65%, respectively, p = 0.45). The maximal value of EVLWi and PVPI remained independently associated with outcome in the whole cohort.ConclusionCompared to ARDS patients without COVID-19, patients with COVID-19 had similar lung mechanics, but higher EVLWi and PVPI values from the beginning of the disease. This was associated with worse oxygenation and with more requirement of prone positioning and ECMO. This is compatible with the specific lung inflammation and severe diffuse alveolar damage related to COVID-19. By contrast, patients with COVID-19 had fewer hemodynamic derangement. Eventually, mortality was similar between groups.Trial registration number and date of registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04337983). Registered 30 March 2020-Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04337983 .

Project description:Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS), associated with Covid-19 infections, is characterized by diffuse lung damage, inflammation and alveolar collapse that impairs gas exchange, leading to hypoxemia and patient' mortality rates above 40%. Here, we describe the development and assessment of 100-nm liposomes that are tailored for pulmonary delivery for treating ARDS, as a model for lung diseases. The liposomal lipid composition (primarily DPPC) was optimized to mimic the lung surfactant composition, and the drug loading process of both methylprednisolone (MPS), a steroid, and N-acetyl cysteine (NAC), a mucolytic agent, reached an encapsulation efficiency of 98% and 92%, respectively. In vitro, treating lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-stimulated RAW 264.7 macrophages with the liposomes decreased TNFα and nitric oxide (NO) secretion, while NAC increased the penetration of nanoparticles through the mucus. In vivo, we used LPS-induced lung inflammation model to assess the accumulation and therapeutic efficacy of the liposomes in C57BL/6 mice, either by intravenous (IV), endotracheal (ET) or IV plus ET nanoparticles administrations. Using both administration methods, liposomes exhibited an increased accumulation profile in the inflamed lungs over 48 h. Interestingly, while IV-administrated liposomes distributed widely throughout the lung, ET liposomes were present in lungs parenchyma but were not detected at some distal regions of the lungs, possibly due to imperfect airflow regimes. Twenty hours after the different treatments, lungs were assessed for markers of inflammation. We found that the nanoparticle treatment had a superior therapeutic effect compared to free drugs in treating ARDS, reducing inflammation and TNFα, IL-6 and IL-1β cytokine secretion in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL), and that the combined treatment, delivering nanoparticles IV and ET simultaneously, had the best outcome of all treatments. Interestingly, also the DPPC lipid component alone played a therapeutic role in reducing inflammatory markers in the lungs. Collectively, we show that therapeutic nanoparticles accumulate in inflamed lungs holding potential for treating lung disorders. SIGNIFICANCE: In this study we compare intravenous versus intratracheal delivery of nanoparticles for treating lung disorders, specifically, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). By co-loading two medications into lipid nanoparticles, we were able to reduce both inflammation and mucus secretion in the inflamed lungs. Both modes of delivery resulted in high nanoparticle accumulation in the lungs, intravenously administered nanoparticles reached lung endothelial while endotracheal delivery reached lung epithelial. Combining both delivery approaches simultaneously provided the best ARDS treatment outcome.

Project description:SARS-CoV-2 is a novel coronavirus that causes acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), death and long-term sequelae. Innate immune cells are critical for host defense but are also the primary drivers of ARDS. The relationships between innate cellular responses in ARDS resulting from COVID-19 compared to other causes of ARDS, such as bacterial sepsis is unclear. Moreover, the beneficial effects of dexamethasone therapy during severe COVID-19 remain speculative, but understanding the mechanistic effects could improve evidence-based therapeutic interventions. To interrogate these relationships, we developed an scRNAseq atlas that is freely accessible (biernaskielab.ca/COVID_neutrophil). We discovered that compared to bacterial ARDS, COVID-19 was associated with distinct neutrophil polarization characterized by either interferon (IFN) or prostaglandin (PG) active states. Neutrophils from bacterial ARDS had higher expression of antibacterial molecules such as PLAC8 and CD83. Dexamethasone therapy in COVID patients rapidly altered the IFNactive state, downregulated interferon responsive genes, and activated IL1R2+ve neutrophils. Dexamethasone also induced the emergence of immature neutrophils expressing immunosuppressive molecules ARG1 and ANXA1, which were not present in healthy controls. Moreover, dexamethasone remodeled global cellular interactions by changing neutrophils from information receivers into information providers. Importantly, male patients had higher proportions of IFNactive neutrophils and a greater degree of steroid-induced immature neutrophil expansion. Indeed, the highest proportion of IFNactive neutrophils was associated with mortality. These results define neutrophil states unique to COVID-19 when contextualized to other life-threatening infections, thereby enhancing the relevance of our findings at the bedside. Furthermore, the molecular benefits of dexamethasone therapy are also defined. The identified molecular pathways can now be targeted to develop improved therapeutics.