Literature DB >> 32737523

Physiological dead space ventilation, disease severity and outcome in ventilated patients with hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to coronavirus disease 2019.

Francesco Vasques1, Barnaby Sanderson1, Federico Formenti2,3, Manu Shankar-Hari1,4, Luigi Camporota5,6.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32737523      PMCID: PMC7393807          DOI: 10.1007/s00134-020-06197-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Intensive Care Med        ISSN: 0342-4642            Impact factor:   17.440


× No keyword cloud information.
Dear Editor, The severity of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) correlates poorly with lung weight and lung mechanics, leading to the proposal of phenotypes that may be associated with similar degree of hypoxaemia but different lung volume, weight, and compliance [1]. The alteration of the pulmonary vascular tone and immune thrombosis of the alveolar capillaries [2] may account for these pathophysiological characteristics and for the high physiological dead space observed in these patients. To describe estimated indices of physiological dead space—and their association with respiratory mechanics, severity of hypoxaemia, biomarkers, and outcomes—we performed a retrospective analysis of adult patients with COVID-19 respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation in four medical Intensive Care Units (ICU) within Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Trust—London, UK (Ethics reference: 10,796). We used the recorded values at the time of worst PaO2/FiO2 observed on the day of critical care admission. Continuous variables were compared using Mann–Whitney U test. This cohort included 213 patients (73% males), mean (95%CI) age 56 (54–57) years, and PaO2/FiO2 128 (121–135) mmHg. When subdivided in four groups based on cut-off PaO2/FiO2 of 150 mmHg and compliance of 40 mL/cmH2O; 72% (n = 154) had PaO2/FiO2 < 150 mmHg, of these, 112 (73%, or 53% of the overall cohort) had compliance < 40 mL/cmH2O (eTable 1). The mean (95%CI) estimated physiological dead space fraction [3] was high in the entire cohort at 0.53 (0.51–0.56). ICU outcome was available for 193 patients, where estimated physiological dead space fraction was higher in non-survivors [median (IQR), 0.57 (0.46–0.65) vs. 0.5 (0.4–0.64); p = 0.03]. All estimates of physiological dead space increased with the degree of hypoxaemia, but not with the reduction in lung compliance (Fig. 1). Compared with patients with PaO2/FiO2 > 150 mmHg, patients with PaO2/FiO2 < 150 mmHg had higher estimated physiological dead space fraction [0.55 (0.52–0.57) vs. 0.5 (0.47–0.53); p = 0.036) (Fig. 1A), mean (95%CI) corrected minute volume [4] [9.3(8.8–9.7) vs. 8.2 (7.6–8.8) L/min; p = 0.004] (Fig. 1B), and ventilatory ratio [5] [1.43 (1.37–1.5) vs. 1.29 (1.2–1.38); p = 0.001] (Fig. 1C). Although patients with compliance < 40 mL/cmH2O had a higher corrected minute volume [4] [9.4 (8.8–10) vs. 8.8 (8.4–9.3) L/min; p = 0.023] (Fig. 1C), there was no difference in the two compliance groups in estimated physiological dead space fraction [0.55 (0.48–0.56) vs. 0.54 (0.52–0.56); p = 0.72] (Fig. 1A) and ventilatory ratio [5] 1.4 (1.3–1.5) vs. 1.4 (1.33–1.46); p = 0.76) (Fig. 1B).
Fig. 1

Distributions of dead space indices in the groups of compliance and PaO2/FiO2. (A): Physiological dead space fraction; (B): ventilatory ratio; (C): corrected minute ventilation

Distributions of dead space indices in the groups of compliance and PaO2/FiO2. (A): Physiological dead space fraction; (B): ventilatory ratio; (C): corrected minute ventilation Physiological dead space correlated with hypoxaemia, but it was dissociated from alterations in lung mechanics in COVID-19 ventilated patients. Immuno-thrombosis is a mechanism that may explain both the increase in physiological dead space and hypoxaemia. Interestingly, we found that the highest median (IQR) levels of D-Dimers [2.1 (1–7) mg/L]; ferritin [1,627 (914–2555) ug/L], CRP [219.5 (147.25–324) mg/L], and troponin [23 (12–62) ng/L] were seen in patients with PaO2/FiO2 < 150 mmHg, but relatively preserved compliance (> 40 mL/cmH2O). However, these values were statistically similar to the ones recorded in the other groups. In conclusion, these data suggest that increased physiological dead space is a characteristic of patients with COVID-19 AHRF, with no relation with compliance of the respiratory system. Given that both PaO2/FiO2 and physiological dead space are worse in non-survivors, it is unclear if dead space is independently associated with mortality or if its effect on outcome is mediated through hypoxaemia. Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material. Supplementary file1 (DOCX 40 kb)
  4 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.  A simple formula for adjusting arterial carbon dioxide tension.

Authors:  H R Wexler; P Lok
Journal:  Can Anaesth Soc J       Date:  1981-07

3.  Estimating dead-space fraction for secondary analyses of acute respiratory distress syndrome clinical trials.

Authors:  Jeremy R Beitler; B Taylor Thompson; Michael A Matthay; Daniel Talmor; Kathleen D Liu; Hanjing Zhuo; Douglas Hayden; Roger G Spragg; Atul Malhotra
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 7.598

4.  COVID-19 pneumonia: different respiratory treatments for different phenotypes?

Authors:  Luciano Gattinoni; Davide Chiumello; Pietro Caironi; Mattia Busana; Federica Romitti; Luca Brazzi; Luigi Camporota
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2020-04-14       Impact factor: 17.440

  4 in total
  11 in total

1.  Increased respiratory dead space could associate with coagulation activation and poor outcomes in COVID-19 ARDS.

Authors:  Jerónimo Graf; Rodrigo Pérez; René López
Journal:  J Crit Care       Date:  2022-06-17       Impact factor: 4.298

2.  Bedside monitoring of lung volume available for gas exchange.

Authors:  Minh C Tran; Douglas C Crockett; John N Cronin; João Batista Borges; Göran Hedenstierna; Anders Larsson; Andrew D Farmery; Federico Formenti
Journal:  Intensive Care Med Exp       Date:  2021-01-11

3.  The impact of ventilation-perfusion inequality in COVID-19: a computational model.

Authors:  Mattia Busana; Lorenzo Giosa; Massimo Cressoni; Alessio Gasperetti; Luca Di Girolamo; Alessandra Martinelli; Aurelio Sonzogni; Luca Lorini; Maria Michela Palumbo; Federica Romitti; Simone Gattarello; Irene Steinberg; Peter Herrmann; Konrad Meissner; Michael Quintel; Luciano Gattinoni
Journal:  J Appl Physiol (1985)       Date:  2021-01-13

Review 4.  Pathophysiology of coronavirus-19 disease acute lung injury.

Authors:  Luigi Camporota; John N Cronin; Mattia Busana; Luciano Gattinoni; Federico Formenti
Journal:  Curr Opin Crit Care       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 3.687

5.  Standardised PaO2/FiO2 ratio in COVID-19: Added value or risky assumptions?

Authors:  Luciano Gattinoni; Mattia Busana; Luigi Camporota
Journal:  Eur J Intern Med       Date:  2021-09-09       Impact factor: 7.749

Review 6.  Therapeutic Effects of Inhaled Nitric Oxide Therapy in COVID-19 Patients.

Authors:  Nikolay O Kamenshchikov; Lorenzo Berra; Ryan W Carroll
Journal:  Biomedicines       Date:  2022-02-03

7.  Clinical characteristics, respiratory management, and determinants of oxygenation in COVID-19 ARDS: A prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Elisa Estenssoro; Cecilia I Loudet; Arnaldo Dubin; Vanina S Kanoore Edul; Gustavo Plotnikow; Macarena Andrian; Ignacio Romero; Judith Sagardía; Marco Bezzi; Verónica Mandich; Carla Groer; Sebastián Torres; Cristina Orlandi; Paolo N Rubatto Birri; María F Valenti; Eleonora Cunto; María G Sáenz; Norberto Tiribelli; Vanina Aphalo; Lisandro Bettini; Fernando G Ríos; Rosa Reina
Journal:  J Crit Care       Date:  2022-03-26       Impact factor: 4.298

8.  Prone Position in COVID-19 and -COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: An International Multicenter Observational Comparative Study.

Authors:  Luigi Camporota; Barnaby Sanderson; Davide Chiumello; Nicolas Terzi; Laurent Argaud; Thomas Rimmelé; Romain Metuor; Aude Verstraete; Martin Cour; Julien Bohé; Vincent Piriou; Pascal Beuret; Claude Guérin
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2022-04-01       Impact factor: 9.296

9.  Improved oxygenation with inhaled milrinone in mechanically ventilated patients with severe COVID-19.

Authors:  Dominik J Vogel; Aimee Brame; Fraser Hanks; Chris Remmington; Natali Chung; Luigi Camporota
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  2021-06-08       Impact factor: 9.166

10.  Reply to Sanfilippo et al. and to Caviedes et al.

Authors:  Deepa J Arachchillage; Sujal R Desai; Anand Devaraj; Carole A Ridge; Simon P G Padley; Brijesh V Patel
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2021-01-15       Impact factor: 21.405

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.