Davide Chiumello1,2, Silvia Mongodi3, Ilaria Algieri4, Giordano Luca Vergani1, Anita Orlando3,4,5, Gabriele Via6, Francesco Crimella7, Massimo Cressoni1, Francesco Mojoli3,5. 1. Centro di Ricerca Coordinata di Insufficienza Respiratoria, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy. 2. Dipartimento di Emergenza-Urgenza, SC Anestesia e Rianimazione, ASST Santi Paolo e Carlo, Milan, Italy. 3. Dipartimento di Medicina Intensiva, SC Anestesia e Rianimazione 1, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy. 4. Unità di Anestesia e Rianimazione, Humanitas San Pio X, Milan, Italy. 5. Dipartimento di Scienze Clinico - Chirurgiche, Diagnostiche, Pediatriche, Università degli Studi di Pavia, Pavia, Italy. 6. Cardiac Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Cardiocentro Ticino, Lugano, Switzerland. 7. Università degli Studi di Brescia, Scuola di specialità di anestesia, rianimazione, terapia intensiva e del dolore, Spedali Civili di Brescia, Brescia, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Lung ultrasound is commonly used to evaluate lung morphology in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Aim of this study was to determine lung ultrasound reliability in assessing lung aeration and positive end-expiratory pressure-induced recruitment compared with CT. DESIGN: Randomized crossover study. SETTING:University hospital ICU. PATIENTS: Twenty sedated paralyzed acute respiratory distress syndrome patients: age 56 years (43-72 yr), body mass index 25 kg/m (22-27 kg/m), and PaO2/FIO2 160 (113-218). INTERVENTIONS:Lung CT and lung ultrasound examination were performed at positive end-expiratory pressure 5 and 15 cm H2O. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Global and regional Lung Ultrasound scores were compared with CT quantitative analysis. Lung recruitment (i.e., decrease in not aerated tissue as assessed with CT) was compared with global Lung Ultrasound score variations. Global Lung Ultrasound score was strongly associated with average lung tissue density at positive end-expiratory pressure 5 (R = 0.78; p < 0.0001) and positive end-expiratory pressure 15 (R = 0.62; p < 0.0001). Regional Lung Ultrasound score strongly correlated with tissue density at positive end-expiratory pressure 5 (rs = 0.79; p < 0.0001) and positive end-expiratory pressure 15 (rs = 0.79; p < 0.0001). Each step increase of regional Lung Ultrasound score was associated with significant increase of tissue density (p < 0.005). A substantial agreement was found between regional Lung Ultrasound score and CT classification at positive end-expiratory pressure 5 (k = 0.69 [0.63-0.75]) and at positive end-expiratory pressure 15 (k = 0.70 [0.64-0.75]). At positive end-expiratory pressure 15, both global Lung Ultrasound score (22 [16-27] vs 26 [21-29]; p < 0.0001) and not aerated tissue (42% [25-57%] vs 52% [39-67%]; p < 0.0001) decreased. However, Lung Ultrasound score variations were not associated with lung recruitment (R = 0.01; p = 0.67). CONCLUSIONS:Lung Ultrasound score is a valid tool to assess regional and global lung aeration. Global Lung Ultrasound score variations should not be used for bedside assessment of positive end-expiratory pressure-induced recruitment.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: Lung ultrasound is commonly used to evaluate lung morphology in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Aim of this study was to determine lung ultrasound reliability in assessing lung aeration and positive end-expiratory pressure-induced recruitment compared with CT. DESIGN: Randomized crossover study. SETTING: University hospital ICU. PATIENTS: Twenty sedated paralyzed acute respiratory distress syndromepatients: age 56 years (43-72 yr), body mass index 25 kg/m (22-27 kg/m), and PaO2/FIO2 160 (113-218). INTERVENTIONS: Lung CT and lung ultrasound examination were performed at positive end-expiratory pressure 5 and 15 cm H2O. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Global and regional Lung Ultrasound scores were compared with CT quantitative analysis. Lung recruitment (i.e., decrease in not aerated tissue as assessed with CT) was compared with global Lung Ultrasound score variations. Global Lung Ultrasound score was strongly associated with average lung tissue density at positive end-expiratory pressure 5 (R = 0.78; p < 0.0001) and positive end-expiratory pressure 15 (R = 0.62; p < 0.0001). Regional Lung Ultrasound score strongly correlated with tissue density at positive end-expiratory pressure 5 (rs = 0.79; p < 0.0001) and positive end-expiratory pressure 15 (rs = 0.79; p < 0.0001). Each step increase of regional Lung Ultrasound score was associated with significant increase of tissue density (p < 0.005). A substantial agreement was found between regional Lung Ultrasound score and CT classification at positive end-expiratory pressure 5 (k = 0.69 [0.63-0.75]) and at positive end-expiratory pressure 15 (k = 0.70 [0.64-0.75]). At positive end-expiratory pressure 15, both global Lung Ultrasound score (22 [16-27] vs 26 [21-29]; p < 0.0001) and not aerated tissue (42% [25-57%] vs 52% [39-67%]; p < 0.0001) decreased. However, Lung Ultrasound score variations were not associated with lung recruitment (R = 0.01; p = 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: Lung Ultrasound score is a valid tool to assess regional and global lung aeration. Global Lung Ultrasound score variations should not be used for bedside assessment of positive end-expiratory pressure-induced recruitment.
Authors: P H Mayo; R Copetti; D Feller-Kopman; G Mathis; E Maury; S Mongodi; F Mojoli; G Volpicelli; M Zanobetti Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2019-08-15 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Belaid Bouhemad; Francesco Mojoli; Nicolas Nowobilski; Arif Hussain; Isabelle Rouquette; Pierre- Grégoire Guinot; Silvia Mongodi Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2020-01-08 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Maurizio Cereda; Yi Xin; Alberto Goffi; Jacob Herrmann; David W Kaczka; Brian P Kavanagh; Gaetano Perchiazzi; Takeshi Yoshida; Rahim R Rizi Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2019-09 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Charalampos Pierrakos; Marry R Smit; Laura A Hagens; Nanon F L Heijnen; Markus W Hollmann; Marcus J Schultz; Frederique Paulus; Lieuwe D J Bos Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2021-06-04 Impact factor: 4.566
Authors: Paolo Pelosi; Lorenzo Ball; Carmen S V Barbas; Rinaldo Bellomo; Karen E A Burns; Sharon Einav; Luciano Gattinoni; John G Laffey; John J Marini; Sheila N Myatra; Marcus J Schultz; Jean Louis Teboul; Patricia R M Rocco Journal: Crit Care Date: 2021-07-16 Impact factor: 9.097