Literature DB >> 32432896

Respiratory Mechanics and Gas Exchange in COVID-19-associated Respiratory Failure.

Edward J Schenck1, Katherine Hoffman1, Parag Goyal1, Justin Choi1, Lisa Torres1, Kapil Rajwani1, Christopher W Tam1, Natalia Ivascu1, Fernando J Martinez1, David A Berlin1.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32432896      PMCID: PMC7462323          DOI: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.202005-427RL

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Am Thorac Soc        ISSN: 2325-6621


× No keyword cloud information.
To the Editor: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has dramatically increased the number of patients requiring mechanical ventilation for respiratory failure. Several case series with data on ventilator variables from small cohorts have been reported (1–4). However, differences in respiratory mechanics between those with early mortality and successful extubation have not been explored. In this study, we report physiologic and clinical information from a large group of patients with COVID-19 during the first week of mechanical ventilation.

Methods

This single center cohort study of patients with COVID-19, with a positive RT-PCR for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), treated with mechanical ventilation was performed at New York Presbyterian Hospital–Weill Cornell Medicine from March 1st, 2020 through April 20th, 2020. Care of the patients was at the discretion of the treating intensivists. Daily briefings were held with critical care leadership to inform best practices as patient load increased. Volume-controlled ventilation was suggested as first choice with a target tidal volume of 6–8 cc/kg of ideal body weight and a plateau pressure ≤30 cm H2O (5). Positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) was selected by the treating physicians. Neuromuscular blockade was suggested for patients with severe hypoxemia or ongoing ventilator dyssynchrony. Prone positioning was suggested if the partial pressure of O2:fraction of inspired O2 (P:F) ratio remained under 150 despite optimization of ventilator settings over the first 48 hours. Pressure-targeted ventilation was considered if patients experienced dyssynchrony when sedation was weaned. We extracted demographic and chest X-ray findings at baseline. Data were extracted from the electronic medical record from Days 1, 3, and 7 of mechanical ventilation. Set fraction of inspired oxygen, plateau pressure, extrinsic PEEP, set tidal volume, and minute ventilation were recorded. In patients treated with pressure-targeted ventilation, the distending pressure was used to estimate a plateau pressure. Volumetric capnography was not available; therefore, a surrogate of dead space, called the ventilatory ratio, was used (6). The ventilatory ratio is an independent predictor of survival in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) (6, 7). We compared the distributions of each individual parameter at Days 1 and 3 between those who remained intubated, those successfully extubated, and those who died. We also examined changes over the three time points across the total cohort. We compared the distributions of each individual variable using nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis tests, with a false discovery rate correction for multiple testing. All analyses were performed using R (version 3.6.3; R Foundation for Statistical Computing, https://www.R-project.org/). The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Weill Cornell Medicine with a waiver of informed consent (no. 20-04021909). Data are presented as median (interquartile range).

Results

Table 1 summarizes demographics, comorbidities, and intensive care unit treatments for this cohort. A total of 267 patients had ventilator data available. The median age was 66 (54–74) years, and men made up 72% of the cohort. Bilateral infiltrates were present on the first available chest film in 86% of patients. A total of 108 (40%) patients was treated with prone positioning, and 161 (60%) patients were treated with neuromuscular blockade during the course of mechanical ventilation. During the observed time period, 77 patients were successfully extubated and 49 died. Among the 140 remaining intubated, the median duration of mechanical ventilation was 18 (14–24) days.
Table 1.

Patient characteristics at hospital presentation (n = 267)

VariableValuesn
Age, median (IQR), yr66 (54–74)267
Sex, n (%) 267
 Male193 (72)
 Female74 (28)
BMI, median (IQR), kg/m229 (25–33)264
Race, n (%) 216
 White94 (44)
 Other58 (27)
 Asian35 (16)
 Black29 (13)
Ethnicity, n (%) 166
 Not Hispanic or Latino111 (67)
 Hispanic or Latino55 (33)
Smoking status, n (%) 267
 No187 (70)
 Former smoker73 (27)
 Active smoker7 (2.6)
Comorbidities, n (%) 267
 CAD47 (18)
 DM86 (32)
 HTN167 (63)
 CVA18 (6.7)
 Active cancer14 (5.2)
 Cirrhosis4 (1.5)
 History of transplant10 (3.7)
 Renal disease26 (9.7)
 Pulmonary disease65 (24)
 Immunosuppressed7 (2.6)
Home medications, n (%) 267
 Angiotensin-converting enzyme88 (33)
 NSAID77 (29)
 Statin108 (40)
ED course, n (%) 
 Supplemental O2 in first 3 h in ED214 (80)267
Initial chest X-ray, n (%) 266
 Bilateral infiltrates228 (86)
 Unilateral infiltrates21 (7.9)
 Clear13 (4.9)
 Pleural effusion2 (0.8)
 Other2 (0.8)
Laboratory values at presentation, median (IQR) 
 White blood cell count, 1,000/mm38.2 (6.0–11.7)257
 Lymphocyte count, 1,000/mm30.75 (0.53–1.05)243
 D-dimer, ng/ml494 (306–926)160
 Ferritin, ng/ml1,018 (569–1,544)181
 Creatine kinase, U/L200 (102–390)150
 Lactate dehydrogenase, U/L532 (408–684)218
 C-reactive protein, mg/dl160 (110–238)199
ICU interventions, n (%) 267
 Neuromuscular blockade161 (60)
 Prone positioning performed108 (40)
 Renal replacement therapy54 (20)
 Noninvasive mechanical ventilation51 (19)
Inpatient medications, n (%) 267
 Antibiotics240 (90)
 Steroids146 (55)
 Tocilizumab28 (10)
 Vasopressors254 (95)
 Remdesivir (or placebo)30 (11)
 Hydroxychloroquine246 (92)
 IVIG in hospital6 (2.2)
Duration of ventilation by outcome, median (IQR)  
 Ventilator days (currently intubated)18 (14–24)141
 Ventilator days (extubated)10 (6–15)77
 Ventilator days (deceased)8 (4–13)49

Definition of abbreviations: BMI = body mass index; CAD = coronary artery disease; CVA = cerebral vascular accident; DM = diabetes mellitus; ED = emergency department; HTN = hypertension; ICU = intensive care unit; IQR = interquartile range; IVIG = intravenous immunoglubulin; NSAID = nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug.

Patient characteristics at hospital presentation (n = 267) Definition of abbreviations: BMI = body mass index; CAD = coronary artery disease; CVA = cerebral vascular accident; DM = diabetes mellitus; ED = emergency department; HTN = hypertension; ICU = intensive care unit; IQR = interquartile range; IVIG = intravenous immunoglubulin; NSAID = nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug. Ventilator variables for the cohort are summarized in Table 2. On Day 1, the median P:F ratio was 103 (82–134). This increased modestly over the first 7 days. The median plateau pressure was 25 (21–29) cm/H2O on Day 1 and remained constant. The median tidal volumes were 7.01 (6.13, 8.10) ml/kg of ideal body weight on Day 1, and decreased over the observed period. The median driving pressure was 14.0 (11.0–17.2) cm/H2O, and decreased. The median extrinsic PEEP was 10 (8–12) cm/H2O, and increased. The median static compliance was 28 (23–38) ml/cm H2O, and remained constant. The median ventilatory ratio was 1.79 (1.47–2.27), and increased over the observed period. Table 3 displays differences in ventilator variables between those who remained intubated, those successfully extubated, and those who died. There were no differences in any ventilator variables observed on Day 1 in any group. However, on Day 3, the minute ventilation was higher in those who died compared with the other groups (corrected q < 0.001). On Day 3 there was a trend for higher ventilator ratio (corrected q = 0.086) and a lower P:F ratio (corrected q = 0.086) in those who died compared with those who remain intubated or were extubated.
Table 2.

Respiratory variables on Days 1, 3, and 7 of mechanical ventilation

VariableDay 1 (n = 267)*Day 3 (n = 252)*Day 7 (n = 206)*P Valueq Value
Pco244 (38–52)46 (41–52)50 (43–56)<0.001<0.001
PaO2:FiO2103 (82–134)138 (106–177)138 (109–168)<0.001<0.001
Exhaled minute volume, L/min9.39 (8.13–11.33)9.99 (8.50–11.70)10.10 (8.60–12.17)0.0390.049
Tidal volume/predicted weight, cc/kg7.01 (6.13–8.10)6.38 (6.00–6.97)6.57 (6.14–7.30)<0.001<0.001
Static compliance, cm H2O28 (23–38)31 (25–40)31 (23–40)0.110.12
Driving pressure, cm H2O14.0 (11.0–17.2)12.0 (9.0–15.2)13.0 (10.0–16.8)0.0070.011
Plateau pressure, cm H2O25.0 (21.0–29.0)24.0 (20.0–28.0)25.0 (22.0–29.0)0.20.2
PEEP, cm H2O10.0 (8.0–12.0)12.0 (10.0–14.0)12.0 (8.0–14.0)0.0020.003
Ventilatory ratio1.79 (1.47–2.27)1.91 (1.55–2.39)2.08 (1.71–2.52)<0.001<0.001

Definition of abbreviations: FiO = fraction of inspired oxygen; PaO = arterial oxygen pressure; Pco2 = partial pressure of carbon dioxide; PEEP = positive end-expiratory pressure.

Data presented as median (interquartile range).

Statistical test: Kruskal-Wallis.

False discovery rate correction for multiple testing.

Table 3.

Respiratory variables on Days 1 and 3 between those who remain intubated, those extubated, and those who died

VariablesCurrently IntubatedExtubatedDeceasedP Value*q Value
Day 1n = 141n = 77n = 49  
 PaCO244 (38–53)43 (38–49)46 (38–53)0.30.8
 PaO2:FiO2105 (81–130)104 (85–139)98 (81–133)0.40.8
 Tidal volume/predicted weight, cc/kg7.03 (6.23–8.10)7.06 (6.17–8.24)6.30 (5.95–7.57)0.20.8
 Static compliance, cm H2O28 (20–39)29 (23–40)29 (24–37)0.50.8
 Driving pressure, cm H2O14.0 (11.0–17.8)13.0 (9.0–16.5)15.0 (12.0–18.0)0.30.8
 Plateau pressure, cm H2O26.0 (22.0–29.0)24.0 (20.0–28.0)26.0 (22.0–30.0)0.40.8
 PEEP, cm H2O10.0 (10.0–12.0)10.0 (8.0–12.0)10.0 (8.5–10.0)0.30.8
 Exhaled minute volume, L/min9.45 (8.09–11.45)9.30 (8.10–10.85)9.95 (8.33–11.38)0.80.9
 Ventilatory ratio1.83 (1.51–2.32)1.76 (1.45–2.18)1.82 (1.44–2.58)0.60.8
Day 3n = 131n = 73n = 43  
 PaCO248 (42–52)46 (40–50)47 (41–52)0.40.5
 PaO2:FiO2136 (106–168)153 (122–192)129 (107–156)0.0280.086
 Tidal volume/predicted weight, cc/kg6.43 (6.01–7.01)6.30 (6.00–6.84)6.35 (5.97–6.96)0.60.6
 Static compliance, cm H2O30 (24–42)31 (26–38)35 (26–44)0.20.3
 Driving pressure, cm H2O13.0 (10.0–16.0)12.0 (9.0–14.2)12.0 (8.5–15.0)0.40.5
 Plateau pressure, cm H2O25 (22–28)23 (19–26)25 (20–28)0.0900.2
 PEEP, cm H2O12.0 (10.0–14.0)10.0 (8.0–14.0)12.0 (10.0–14.0)0.0210.086
 Exhaled minute volume, L/min10.20 (8.68–11.85)9.00 (8.08–10.00)11.40 (10.00–12.50)<0.001<0.001
 Ventilatory ratio1.97 (1.63–2.50)1.79 (1.48–2.12)2.26 (1.53–2.50)0.0360.086

Definition of abbreviations: FiO = fraction of inspired oxygen; PaCO = arterial carbon dioxide pressure; PaO = arterial oxygen pressure; PEEP = positive end-expiratory pressure.

Statistical test: Kruskal-Wallis.

False discovery rate correction for multiple testing.

Data presented as median (interquartile range).

Respiratory variables on Days 1, 3, and 7 of mechanical ventilation Definition of abbreviations: FiO = fraction of inspired oxygen; PaO = arterial oxygen pressure; Pco2 = partial pressure of carbon dioxide; PEEP = positive end-expiratory pressure. Data presented as median (interquartile range). Statistical test: Kruskal-Wallis. False discovery rate correction for multiple testing. Respiratory variables on Days 1 and 3 between those who remain intubated, those extubated, and those who died Definition of abbreviations: FiO = fraction of inspired oxygen; PaCO = arterial carbon dioxide pressure; PaO = arterial oxygen pressure; PEEP = positive end-expiratory pressure. Statistical test: Kruskal-Wallis. False discovery rate correction for multiple testing. Data presented as median (interquartile range).

Discussion

This study of 267 patients demonstrates that respiratory failure related to COVID-19 meets the criteria for moderate to severe ARDS, given the initial median P:F ratio of 103. These data compliment other early reports (1, 4, 8). There was also a high use of rescue therapies, such as prone positioning and a prolonged duration of mechanical ventilation. This severe morbidity occurred despite the use of a lung-protective ventilation strategy, as evidenced by the median plateau pressures and tidal volume. An important question is whether or not COVID-19 is a distinct form of ARDS that requires a different treatment strategy (9). Importantly, ARDS is not a single disease. Rather, patients with ARDS have diverse pathology, and the syndrome’s definition is used to identify eligibility for therapeutic trials. In this cohort, the baseline extrinsic PEEP, driving pressure, and static compliance were similar to ARDS Network trials, and the recent worldwide observational study, LUNGSAFE (Large observational study to UNderstand the Global impact of Severe Acute respiratory FailurE) (10–12). However, the variability of the respiratory compliance is considerable, as 25% of patients have a compliance greater than 38 ml/cm H2O, which suggests significant heterogeneity. The duration of mechanical ventilation was prolonged in those that remained intubated, which is longer than in other studies of ARDS (10). Surprisingly, there were no observed differences between those with early mortality compared with those that remained intubated or were successfully extubated in this cohort. However, on Day 3, increasing minute ventilation and ventilatory ratio were seen in those who died, along with a P:F ratio that failed to improve. These findings suggest the potential for differential patient trajectories within this disease. There are a number of limitations of our study. First, the three time points of our study are only snapshots of the dynamic nature of COVID-19 respiratory failure. Moreover, the majority of patients in this cohort were still receiving mechanical ventilation at the time of this analysis. A more definitive comparison of COVID-19 respiratory failure with other forms of ARDS would require rigorous comparison with a contemporary control group. Our analysis of respiratory system compliance does not account for the effects of PEEP titration. Moreover, we lack volumetric capnography, and therefore cannot assess the effects of metabolic rate on gas exchange. We would expect that metabolic rate would vary greatly during fever and neuromuscular blockade (13). A more complete characterization of gas exchange in COVID-19 would require direct measurement of the dead space and shunt fraction. Another limitation of our study is the incomplete standardization of ventilator practice without the use of a formal PEEP titration table.

Conclusions

Patients in this cohort of COVID-19 respiratory failure meet criteria for moderate to severe ARDS, and had baseline respiratory mechanics that were comparable to those in patients enrolled in prior therapeutic trials and observational studies of ARDS. Baseline respiratory mechanics were not different between those who died and those extubated or who remained intubated. Differences in these groups developed over time, suggesting differential trajectories of COVID-19–associated respiratory failure.
  12 in total

1.  Ventilatory ratio: a simple bedside measure of ventilation.

Authors:  P Sinha; N J Fauvel; S Singh; N Soni
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  2009-04-03       Impact factor: 9.166

2.  Epidemiology, Patterns of Care, and Mortality for Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Intensive Care Units in 50 Countries.

Authors:  Giacomo Bellani; John G Laffey; Tài Pham; Eddy Fan; Laurent Brochard; Andres Esteban; Luciano Gattinoni; Frank van Haren; Anders Larsson; Daniel F McAuley; Marco Ranieri; Gordon Rubenfeld; B Taylor Thompson; Hermann Wrigge; Arthur S Slutsky; Antonio Pesenti
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2016-02-23       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Early Neuromuscular Blockade in the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome. Reply.

Authors:  Marc Moss; Christine A Ulysse; Derek C Angus
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2019-08-22       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Baseline Characteristics and Outcomes of 1591 Patients Infected With SARS-CoV-2 Admitted to ICUs of the Lombardy Region, Italy.

Authors:  Giacomo Grasselli; Alberto Zangrillo; Alberto Zanella; Massimo Antonelli; Luca Cabrini; Antonio Castelli; Danilo Cereda; Antonio Coluccello; Giuseppe Foti; Roberto Fumagalli; Giorgio Iotti; Nicola Latronico; Luca Lorini; Stefano Merler; Giuseppe Natalini; Alessandra Piatti; Marco Vito Ranieri; Anna Mara Scandroglio; Enrico Storti; Maurizio Cecconi; Antonio Pesenti
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2020-04-28       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Ventilation with lower tidal volumes as compared with traditional tidal volumes for acute lung injury and the acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Authors:  Roy G Brower; Michael A Matthay; Alan Morris; David Schoenfeld; B Taylor Thompson; Arthur Wheeler
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-05-04       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  The effect of mechanical ventilation on oxygen consumption in critically ill patients.

Authors:  C A Manthous; J B Hall; R Kushner; G A Schmidt; G Russo; L D Wood
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 21.405

7.  Physiologic Analysis and Clinical Performance of the Ventilatory Ratio in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

Authors:  Pratik Sinha; Carolyn S Calfee; Jeremy R Beitler; Neil Soni; Kelly Ho; Michael A Matthay; Richard H Kallet
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2019-02-01       Impact factor: 30.528

8.  Respiratory Pathophysiology of Mechanically Ventilated Patients with COVID-19: A Cohort Study.

Authors:  David R Ziehr; Jehan Alladina; Camille R Petri; Jason H Maley; Ari Moskowitz; Benjamin D Medoff; Kathryn A Hibbert; B Taylor Thompson; C Corey Hardin
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2020-06-15       Impact factor: 21.405

9.  COVID-19 Does Not Lead to a "Typical" Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

Authors:  Luciano Gattinoni; Silvia Coppola; Massimo Cressoni; Mattia Busana; Sandra Rossi; Davide Chiumello
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2020-05-15       Impact factor: 21.405

10.  Ventilatory Ratio in Hypercapnic Mechanically Ventilated Patients with COVID-19-associated Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

Authors:  Xiaoqing Liu; Xuesong Liu; Yonghao Xu; Zhiheng Xu; Yongbo Huang; Sibei Chen; Shiyue Li; Dongdong Liu; Zhimin Lin; Yimin Li
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2020-05-15       Impact factor: 21.405

View more
  45 in total

1.  Transient cryoglobulinaemic vasculitis following ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine.

Authors:  Sadaf Ahmer; Jack Bourke; Nima Mesbah Ardakani
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2022-07-18

2.  An appraisal of respiratory system compliance in mechanically ventilated covid-19 patients.

Authors:  Gianluigi Li Bassi; Jacky Y Suen; Heidi J Dalton; Nicole White; Sally Shrapnel; Jonathon P Fanning; Benoit Liquet; Samuel Hinton; Aapeli Vuorinen; Gareth Booth; Jonathan E Millar; Simon Forsyth; Mauro Panigada; John Laffey; Daniel Brodie; Eddy Fan; Antoni Torres; Davide Chiumello; Amanda Corley; Alyaa Elhazmi; Carol Hodgson; Shingo Ichiba; Carlos Luna; Srinivas Murthy; Alistair Nichol; Pauline Yeung Ng; Mark Ogino; Antonio Pesenti; Huynh Trung Trieu; John F Fraser
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2021-06-09       Impact factor: 9.097

Review 3.  Features of HLA class I expression and its clinical relevance in SARS-CoV-2: What do we know so far?

Authors:  Abdellatif Bouayad
Journal:  Rev Med Virol       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 11.043

4.  Critical carE Database for Advanced Research (CEDAR): An automated method to support intensive care units with electronic health record data.

Authors:  Edward J Schenck; Katherine L Hoffman; Marika Cusick; Joseph Kabariti; Evan T Sholle; Thomas R Campion
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2021-04-14       Impact factor: 8.000

Review 5.  COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome: is a different approach to management warranted?

Authors:  Eddy Fan; Jeremy R Beitler; Laurent Brochard; Carolyn S Calfee; Niall D Ferguson; Arthur S Slutsky; Daniel Brodie
Journal:  Lancet Respir Med       Date:  2020-07-06       Impact factor: 30.700

6.  Letter from the United States: A New York experience with COVID-19.

Authors:  Edward J Schenck; Meredith L Turetz; Michael S Niederman
Journal:  Respirology       Date:  2020-07-05       Impact factor: 6.424

7.  Neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA) for COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome: a multicenter observational study.

Authors:  Romain Courcelle; Stéphane Gaudry; Nicolas Serck; Gauthier Blonz; Jean-Baptiste Lascarrou; David Grimaldi
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2020-07-19       Impact factor: 9.097

Review 8.  Diagnosis and management of acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Authors:  Shannon M Fernando; Bruno L Ferreyro; Martin Urner; Laveena Munshi; Eddy Fan
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2021-05-25       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 9. 

Authors:  Shannon M Fernando; Bruno L Ferreyro; Martin Urner; Laveena Munshi; Eddy Fan
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2021-06-21       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 10.  Precision Medicine and Heterogeneity of Treatment Effect in Therapies for ARDS.

Authors:  Yasin A Khan; Eddy Fan; Niall D Ferguson
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2021-07-14       Impact factor: 9.410

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.