Ary Serpa Neto1, Carmen S V Barbas2, Fabienne D Simonis3, Antonio Artigas-Raventós4, Jaume Canet5, Rogier M Determann6, James Anstey7, Goran Hedenstierna8, Sabrine N T Hemmes9, Greet Hermans10, Michael Hiesmayr11, Markus W Hollmann9, Samir Jaber12, Ignacio Martin-Loeches13, Gary H Mills14, Rupert M Pearse15, Christian Putensen16, Werner Schmid11, Paolo Severgnini17, Roger Smith7, Tanja A Treschan18, Edda M Tschernko11, Marcos F V Melo19, Hermann Wrigge20, Marcelo Gama de Abreu21, Paolo Pelosi22, Marcus J Schultz3. 1. Department of Intensive Care and Laboratory of Experimental Intensive Care and Anesthesiology (LEICA), Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil. Electronic address: aryserpa@terra.com.br. 2. Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil; Department of Pulmonology, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil. 3. Department of Intensive Care and Laboratory of Experimental Intensive Care and Anesthesiology (LEICA), Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands. 4. Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Hospital de Sabadell, CIBER de Enfermedades Respiratorias, Corporació Sanitaria I Universitària Parc Taulí, Sabadell, Spain. 5. Department of Anesthesiology, Hospital Universitari Germans Trias I Pujol, Barcelona, Spain. 6. Department of Critical Care, Westfriesgasthuis, Hoorn, Netherlands. 7. Department of Intensive Care, St Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 8. Department of Medical Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. 9. Department of Anesthesiology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands. 10. Medical Intensive Care Unit, Division of General Internal Medicine, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Laboratory of Intensive Care Medicine, Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 11. Division of Cardiac, Thoracic, and Vascular Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 12. Department of Critical Care Medicine and Anesthesiology (SAR B), Saint Eloi University Hospital, Montpellier, France. 13. Department of Clinical Medicine, St James's Hospital, Multidisciplinary Intensive Care Research Organization (MICRO), Trinity Centre for Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland. 14. Department of Anaesthesia and Critical Care Medicine, Sheffield Teaching Hospital, Sheffield, UK. 15. Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK. 16. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany. 17. Department of Biotechnologies and Sciences of Life, Insubria University, Varese, Italy. 18. Department of Anaesthesiology, Düsseldorf University Hospital, Düsseldorf, Germany. 19. Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 20. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany. 21. Pulmonary Engineering Group, Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, and Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany. 22. Department of Surgical Sciences and Integrated Diagnostics, IRCCS San Martino IST, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Scant information exists about the epidemiological characteristics and outcome of patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) at risk of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and how ventilation is managed in these individuals. We aimed to establish the epidemiological characteristics of patients at risk of ARDS, describe ventilation management in this population, and assess outcomes compared with people at no risk of ARDS. METHODS: PRoVENT (PRactice of VENTilation in critically ill patients without ARDS at onset of ventilation) is an international, multicentre, prospective study undertaken at 119 ICUs in 16 countries worldwide. All patients aged 18 years or older who were receiving mechanical ventilation in participating ICUs during a 1-week period between January, 2014, and January, 2015, were enrolled into the study. The Lung Injury Prediction Score (LIPS) was used to stratify risk of ARDS, with a score of 4 or higher defining those at risk of ARDS. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients at risk of ARDS. Secondary outcomes included ventilatory management (including tidal volume [VT] expressed as mL/kg predicted bodyweight [PBW], and positive end-expiratory pressure [PEEP] expressed as cm H2O), development of pulmonary complications, and clinical outcomes. The PRoVENT study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01868321. The study has been completed. FINDINGS: Of 3023 patients screened for the study, 935 individuals fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Of these critically ill patients, 282 were at risk of ARDS (30%, 95% CI 27-33), representing 0·14 cases per ICU bed over a 1-week period. VT was similar for patients at risk and not at risk of ARDS (median 7·6 mL/kg PBW [IQR 6·7-9·1] vs 7·9 mL/kg PBW [6·8-9·1]; p=0·346). PEEP was higher in patients at risk of ARDS compared with those not at risk (median 6·0 cm H2O [IQR 5·0-8·0] vs 5·0 cm H2O [5·0-7·0]; p<0·0001). The prevalence of ARDS in patients at risk of ARDS was higher than in individuals not at risk of ARDS (19/260 [7%] vs 17/556 [3%]; p=0·004). Compared with individuals not at risk of ARDS, patients at risk of ARDS had higher in-hospital mortality (86/543 [16%] vs 74/232 [32%]; p<0·0001), ICU mortality (62/533 [12%] vs 66/227 [29%]; p<0·0001), and 90-day mortality (109/653 [17%] vs 88/282 [31%]; p<0·0001). VT did not differ between patients who did and did not develop ARDS (p=0·471 for those at risk of ARDS; p=0·323 for those not at risk). INTERPRETATION: Around a third of patients receiving mechanical ventilation in the ICU were at risk of ARDS. Pulmonary complications occur frequently in patients at risk of ARDS and their clinical outcome is worse compared with those not at risk of ARDS. There is potential for improvement in the management of patients without ARDS. Further refinements are needed for prediction of ARDS. FUNDING: None.
BACKGROUND: Scant information exists about the epidemiological characteristics and outcome of patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) at risk of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and how ventilation is managed in these individuals. We aimed to establish the epidemiological characteristics of patients at risk of ARDS, describe ventilation management in this population, and assess outcomes compared with people at no risk of ARDS. METHODS: PRoVENT (PRactice of VENTilation in critically ill patients without ARDS at onset of ventilation) is an international, multicentre, prospective study undertaken at 119 ICUs in 16 countries worldwide. All patients aged 18 years or older who were receiving mechanical ventilation in participating ICUs during a 1-week period between January, 2014, and January, 2015, were enrolled into the study. The Lung Injury Prediction Score (LIPS) was used to stratify risk of ARDS, with a score of 4 or higher defining those at risk of ARDS. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients at risk of ARDS. Secondary outcomes included ventilatory management (including tidal volume [VT] expressed as mL/kg predicted bodyweight [PBW], and positive end-expiratory pressure [PEEP] expressed as cm H2O), development of pulmonary complications, and clinical outcomes. The PRoVENT study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01868321. The study has been completed. FINDINGS: Of 3023 patients screened for the study, 935 individuals fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Of these critically ill patients, 282 were at risk of ARDS (30%, 95% CI 27-33), representing 0·14 cases per ICU bed over a 1-week period. VT was similar for patients at risk and not at risk of ARDS (median 7·6 mL/kg PBW [IQR 6·7-9·1] vs 7·9 mL/kg PBW [6·8-9·1]; p=0·346). PEEP was higher in patients at risk of ARDS compared with those not at risk (median 6·0 cm H2O [IQR 5·0-8·0] vs 5·0 cm H2O [5·0-7·0]; p<0·0001). The prevalence of ARDS in patients at risk of ARDS was higher than in individuals not at risk of ARDS (19/260 [7%] vs 17/556 [3%]; p=0·004). Compared with individuals not at risk of ARDS, patients at risk of ARDS had higher in-hospital mortality (86/543 [16%] vs 74/232 [32%]; p<0·0001), ICU mortality (62/533 [12%] vs 66/227 [29%]; p<0·0001), and 90-day mortality (109/653 [17%] vs 88/282 [31%]; p<0·0001). VT did not differ between patients who did and did not develop ARDS (p=0·471 for those at risk of ARDS; p=0·323 for those not at risk). INTERPRETATION: Around a third of patients receiving mechanical ventilation in the ICU were at risk of ARDS. Pulmonary complications occur frequently in patients at risk of ARDS and their clinical outcome is worse compared with those not at risk of ARDS. There is potential for improvement in the management of patients without ARDS. Further refinements are needed for prediction of ARDS. FUNDING: None.
Authors: Thomas Kiss; Thomas Bluth; Anja Braune; Robert Huhle; Axel Denz; Moritz Herzog; Johannes Herold; Luigi Vivona; Marco Millone; Alice Bergamaschi; Michael Andreeff; Martin Scharffenberg; Jakob Wittenstein; Marcos F Vidal Melo; Thea Koch; Patricia R M Rocco; Paolo Pelosi; Jörg Kotzerke; Marcelo Gama de Abreu Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Brian M Fuller; David Page; Robert J Stephens; Brian W Roberts; Anne M Drewry; Enyo Ablordeppey; Nicholas M Mohr; Marin H Kollef Journal: Shock Date: 2018-03 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: Georgios D Kitsios; Libing Yang; Dimitris V Manatakis; Mehdi Nouraie; John Evankovich; William Bain; Daniel G Dunlap; Faraaz Shah; Ian J Barbash; Sarah F Rapport; Yingze Zhang; Rebecca S DeSensi; Nathaniel M Weathington; Bill B Chen; Prabir Ray; Rama K Mallampalli; Panayiotis V Benos; Janet S Lee; Alison Morris; Bryan J McVerry Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2019-12 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Brian M Fuller; Nicholas M Mohr; Anne M Drewry; Ian T Ferguson; Stephen Trzeciak; Marin H Kollef; Brian W Roberts Journal: J Crit Care Date: 2017-04-26 Impact factor: 3.425
Authors: Anna Geke Algera; Luigi Pisani; Ary Serpa Neto; Sylvia S den Boer; Frank F H Bosch; Karina Bruin; Pauline M Klooster; Nardo J M Van der Meer; Ralph O Nowitzky; Ilse M Purmer; Mathilde Slabbekoorn; Peter E Spronk; Jan van Vliet; Jan J Weenink; Marcelo Gama de Abreu; Paolo Pelosi; Marcus J Schultz; Frederique Paulus Journal: JAMA Date: 2020-12-22 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Fabienne D Simonis; Ary Serpa Neto; Jan M Binnekade; Annemarije Braber; Karina C M Bruin; Rogier M Determann; Geert-Jan Goekoop; Jeroen Heidt; Janneke Horn; Gerard Innemee; Evert de Jonge; Nicole P Juffermans; Peter E Spronk; Lotte M Steuten; Pieter Roel Tuinman; Rob B P de Wilde; Marijn Vriends; Marcelo Gama de Abreu; Paolo Pelosi; Marcus J Schultz Journal: JAMA Date: 2018-11-13 Impact factor: 56.272