Andrew C Miller1,2, Paula A Ferrada3, Sameer S Kadri1, Krupa Nataraj-Bhandari2, Amir Vahedian-Azimi4, Sadeq A Quraishi5,6. 1. 1 Critical Care Medicine Department, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. 2. 2 Department of Emergency Medicine, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA. 3. 3 Division of Trauma and Critical Care, Department of Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA. 4. 4 Trauma Research Center, Nursing Faculty, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. 5. 5 Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 6. 6 Department of Anaesthesia, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Smoke inhalation-associated acute lung injury (SI-ALI) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in victims of fire tragedies. To date, there are no evidence-based guidelines on ventilation strategies in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) after smoke inhalation. We reviewed the existing literature for clinical studies of salvage mechanical ventilation (MV) strategies in patients with SI-ALI, focusing on mortality and pneumonia as outcomes. METHODS: A systematic search was designed in accordance with preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Risk of bias assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS; 0 to 9 stars), with a score ≥7 being the threshold for inclusion in the meta-analysis. A systematic search strategy was used to search 10 databases. Clinical studies were included in which patients: (1) experienced smoke inhalation, (2) treated with MV, and (3) described a concurrent or historical control group. RESULTS: A total of 226 potentially relevant studies were identified, of which 7 studies on high-frequency percussive ventilation (HFPV) met inclusion criteria. No studies met inclusion for meta-analysis (NOS ≥ 7). In studies comparing HFPV to conventional mechanical ventilation (CMV), mortality and pneumonia incidence improved in 3 studies and remained unchanged in 3 others. No change in ventilator days or ICU length of stay was observed; however, oxygenation and work of breathing improved with HFPV. CONCLUSIONS: Mechanical ventilation in patients with SI-ALI has not been well studied. High-frequency percussive ventilation may decrease in-hospital mortality and pneumonia incidence when compared to CMV. The absence of "good" quality evidence precluded meta-analysis. Based upon low-quality evidence, there was a very weak recommendation that HFPV use may be associated with lower mortality and pneumonia rates in patients with SI-ALI. Given SI-ALI's unique underlying pathophysiology, and its potential implications on therapy, randomized controlled studies are required to ensure that patients receive the safest and most effective care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered with PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews (#47015).
BACKGROUND:Smoke inhalation-associated acute lung injury (SI-ALI) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in victims of fire tragedies. To date, there are no evidence-based guidelines on ventilation strategies in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) after smoke inhalation. We reviewed the existing literature for clinical studies of salvage mechanical ventilation (MV) strategies in patients with SI-ALI, focusing on mortality and pneumonia as outcomes. METHODS: A systematic search was designed in accordance with preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Risk of bias assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS; 0 to 9 stars), with a score ≥7 being the threshold for inclusion in the meta-analysis. A systematic search strategy was used to search 10 databases. Clinical studies were included in which patients: (1) experienced smoke inhalation, (2) treated with MV, and (3) described a concurrent or historical control group. RESULTS: A total of 226 potentially relevant studies were identified, of which 7 studies on high-frequency percussive ventilation (HFPV) met inclusion criteria. No studies met inclusion for meta-analysis (NOS ≥ 7). In studies comparing HFPV to conventional mechanical ventilation (CMV), mortality and pneumonia incidence improved in 3 studies and remained unchanged in 3 others. No change in ventilator days or ICU length of stay was observed; however, oxygenation and work of breathing improved with HFPV. CONCLUSIONS: Mechanical ventilation in patients with SI-ALI has not been well studied. High-frequency percussive ventilation may decrease in-hospital mortality and pneumonia incidence when compared to CMV. The absence of "good" quality evidence precluded meta-analysis. Based upon low-quality evidence, there was a very weak recommendation that HFPV use may be associated with lower mortality and pneumonia rates in patients with SI-ALI. Given SI-ALI's unique underlying pathophysiology, and its potential implications on therapy, randomized controlled studies are required to ensure that patients receive the safest and most effective care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered with PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews (#47015).