Literature DB >> 32945935

How severe COVID-19 infection is changing ARDS management.

Niall D Ferguson1,2,3,4, Tài Pham5,6,7, Michelle Ng Gong8,9.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32945935      PMCID: PMC7499412          DOI: 10.1007/s00134-020-06245-6

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


× No keyword cloud information.

Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose….

Over the last 6 months intensivists and non-intensivists around the world have been treating patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) brought on by COVID-19, often in extreme conditions with overwhelmed healthcare systems. As the first wave of the pandemic has passed in Europe and continues to progress in parts of North America, we pause to consider how severe COVID-19 infection is changing ARDS management and what the lasting implications might be for ARDS from other causes (Table 1).
Table 1

How severe COVID-19 is changing ARDS management

ParadigmExample
Increased adoption of therapies previously shown to be effective in non-COVID-19 ARDSProne positioning in moderate-severe ARDS
Spillover adoption of therapies shown to be effective in COVID-19 ARDSEarly low-dose corticosteroids
Applying evidence-based practice, informed by bedside physiologyIncreased clinical interest in respiratory mechanics
Expanding new lines of investigation that may be relevant to both COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS

Systemic anticoagulation and anti-platelet agents for pulmonary vascular thrombosis

Anti-inflammatory agents

Sedation with volatile anaesthetic agents

Stromal cell therapies

Highlighting the existence and importance of heterogeneity of treatment effect in ARDS for many therapies

Differential effects of steroids by severity

Proposals for several methods to individualize therapies (sub-phenotypes)

Socializing randomization as the norm in critical care settingsSuccessful implementation of RECOVERY, REMAP-CAP, ACTIV platform trials
How severe COVID-19 is changing ARDS management Systemic anticoagulation and anti-platelet agents for pulmonary vascular thrombosis Anti-inflammatory agents Sedation with volatile anaesthetic agents Stromal cell therapies Differential effects of steroids by severity Proposals for several methods to individualize therapies (sub-phenotypes) Our first thought is that COVID-19 is changing everything and nothing about ARDS management. Everything, in the sense that the thousands of severe COVID-19 patients have brought widespread attention from non-intensivists and the general public to the high mortality and management challenges of ARDS. This is refreshing as prior to the pandemic, ARDS was often under-recognized, even among the intensivists who cared for such patients [1]. But at the same time, nothing has changed as all of these ‘new-found’ therapies and supportive techniques are not actually new—they just have not been as well understood, applied or implemented before the pandemic. The foundation to ARDS management has been meticulous supportive care such as low tidal volume ventilation, and prone positioning in moderate-severe ARDS, both of which have been shown to reduce mortality. While proning had been reasonably well adopted in many European centres, its uptake in North America was poor, even in academic teaching centres, ranging from 8 to 15% of moderate-severe ARDS patients [1, 2]. Common reasons for deciding not to prone include a lack of comfort with the procedure, misconceptions that the patient may not be hypoxemic enough, and concerns about hemodynamics [3]. With COVID-19 surges, the large number of severely hypoxemic patients forced many intensive care units (ICUs) to discover that they can indeed provide care in the prone position for moderate-severe ARDS patients. Most centres have trained staff in how to prone and many have developed dedicated proning teams to facilitate this care [4]. Indeed, interest in proning COVID-19 patients has extended to non-intubated awake patients, [5] and proning of intubated and non-intubated patients has even been recognized in mainstream media (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/health/coronavirus-proning-lungs.html). Even after the COVID-19 surge has passed, we are hopeful that the future threshold for proning in ARDS will remain much lower than it was in 2019. ARDS is known to be a heterogeneous syndrome with different sub-phenotypes that are characterized by different clinical features, inflammatory cytokine profiles, physiology and differential response to interventions [6, 7]. COVID-19 is no exception to this rule. Indeed, the large number of simultaneous patients with the same underlying etiology but varying physiological responses has put the importance of adapting mechanical ventilation strategies to the individual patient into sharp focus. One positive effect of clinical debates that have raged in the pages of medical journals and on Twitter is that respiratory mechanics are cool again. Many more clinicians are interested in the basics such as plateau pressure, respiratory system compliance and driving pressure, with others still going beyond that and considering airway opening pressure and recruitment to inflation ratio, [8] occlusion pressure, [9] and transpulmonary pressures [10]. While we hope this will continue post-COVID-19, ongoing education, supervision and quality control will be necessary, as more complicated monitoring techniques may provide misleading information if improperly performed or interpreted—cautionary tale of the pulmonary artery catheter. Similarly, corticosteroids and other anti-inflammatory agents have been a source of controversy in ARDS and sepsis for more than 30 years with ongoing questions about which patients, if any, would most benefit. A number of randomized clinical trials have promised benefit of steroids over the years, though these have been small and often single-centre in nature. A recent multi-centre Spanish trial (Dexa) showed a mortality benefit with early dexamethasone in patients with persistent ARDS [11]. This was consistent with a growing body of literature showing benefit for steroids in severe community-acquired pneumonia. Pre-pandemic, corticosteroids were not routinely administered, however, because of both concerns about side-effects and ongoing uncertainty of their benefit. An order of magnitude larger than the previous largest trial, the preliminary report from the RECOVERY trial convincingly shows that early low-dose dexamethasone improves survival in patients with COVID-19, but heterogeneity of treatment effect is again appreciated with the largest benefit seen among those on mechanical ventilation, while those with no supplemental oxygen requirement did not benefit [12]. While we suspect that we will see a significant increase in corticosteroid use in early non-COVID-19 ARDS, we hope that there will be additional studies in these patients both to determine short-term efficacy, as the mechanism of action may be different in COVID-19, and to examine long-term outcomes like ICU-acquired weakness. It is becoming clear that many patients with COVID-19 are in a hypercoagulable state and a number of reports show thrombosis and endothelial injury. This may account for some of the less typical ARDS presentations and has fueled debate about whether COVID-19 ARDS is actually ARDS [13]. However, inflammation, endothelial injury and pulmonary intravascular coagulation are common in ARDS [14]. Many patients with ARDS from COVID-19 display huge physiological deadspace, right ventricle dysfunction, and very high ventilatory ratios. However, we know that these findings are also prevalent in non-COVID-19 ARDS and are associated with increased mortality [15]. Prophylactic anticoagulation has always been part of the management in ARDS and other ICU patients. With ongoing trials pending, it remains to be seen whether higher doses of anticoagulation and anti-platelet agents would benefit ARDS patients from COVID or any other causes. This pandemic has provided many clear examples of what not to do when it comes to generating new knowledge and integrating this into practice – from uncontrolled case series, opinion being touted as evidence in high impact journals, retracted studies, and questionable medical advice via Twitter and TikTok. These in themselves provide lessons in retrospect, but perhaps the most positive influence that the pandemic could have on future ARDS management is to socialize and normalize enrolment in randomized trials in the intensive care environment. The creation and success of ongoing platform trials such as RECOVERY, REMAP-CAP, and ACTIV during the pandemic will hopefully spur clinicians, patients and their families, regulators, funders, and research ethics boards to demand enrolment into randomized clinical trials, [16] as is commonly the case in the cancer field. The COVID-19 pandemic has provided many intensivists (and some non-intensivists) several years’ worth of severe ARDS management experience over the course of just a few months. While the challenges have, in places, been extreme, we hope that this experience will benefit future ARDS patients for years to come, even when the COVID-19 pandemic is for the history books.
  16 in total

1.  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

2.  Early Neuromuscular Blockade in the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

Authors:  Marc Moss; David T Huang; Roy G Brower; Niall D Ferguson; Adit A Ginde; M N Gong; Colin K Grissom; Stephanie Gundel; Douglas Hayden; R Duncan Hite; Peter C Hou; Catherine L Hough; Theodore J Iwashyna; Akram Khan; Kathleen D Liu; Daniel Talmor; B Taylor Thompson; Christine A Ulysse; Donald M Yealy; Derek C Angus
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2019-05-19       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Machine Learning Classifier Models Can Identify Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Phenotypes Using Readily Available Clinical Data.

Authors:  Pratik Sinha; Matthew M Churpek; Carolyn S Calfee
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2020-10-01       Impact factor: 21.405

Review 4.  Pulmonary pathology of acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Authors:  J F Tomashefski
Journal:  Clin Chest Med       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 2.878

5.  Potential for Lung Recruitment Estimated by the Recruitment-to-Inflation Ratio in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome. A Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Lu Chen; Lorenzo Del Sorbo; Domenico L Grieco; Detajin Junhasavasdikul; Nuttapol Rittayamai; Ibrahim Soliman; Michael C Sklar; Michela Rauseo; Niall D Ferguson; Eddy Fan; Jean-Christophe M Richard; Laurent Brochard
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2020-01-15       Impact factor: 21.405

6.  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

7.  Integrating the evidence: confronting the COVID-19 elephant.

Authors:  John J Marini; R Phillip Dellinger; Daniel Brodie
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2020-07-25       Impact factor: 17.440

8.  Epidemiology, clinical course, and outcomes of critically ill adults with COVID-19 in New York City: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Matthew J Cummings; Matthew R Baldwin; Darryl Abrams; Samuel D Jacobson; Benjamin J Meyer; Elizabeth M Balough; Justin G Aaron; Jan Claassen; LeRoy E Rabbani; Jonathan Hastie; Beth R Hochman; John Salazar-Schicchi; Natalie H Yip; Daniel Brodie; Max R O'Donnell
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2020-05-19       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  A novel non-invasive method to detect excessively high respiratory effort and dynamic transpulmonary driving pressure during mechanical ventilation.

Authors:  Michele Bertoni; Irene Telias; Martin Urner; Michael Long; Lorenzo Del Sorbo; Eddy Fan; Christer Sinderby; Jennifer Beck; Ling Liu; Haibo Qiu; Jenna Wong; Arthur S Slutsky; Niall D Ferguson; Laurent J Brochard; Ewan C Goligher
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2019-11-06       Impact factor: 9.097

10.  Dexamethasone in Hospitalized Patients with Covid-19.

Authors:  Peter Horby; Wei Shen Lim; Jonathan R Emberson; Marion Mafham; Jennifer L Bell; Louise Linsell; Natalie Staplin; Christopher Brightling; Andrew Ustianowski; Einas Elmahi; Benjamin Prudon; Christopher Green; Timothy Felton; David Chadwick; Kanchan Rege; Christopher Fegan; Lucy C Chappell; Saul N Faust; Thomas Jaki; Katie Jeffery; Alan Montgomery; Kathryn Rowan; Edmund Juszczak; J Kenneth Baillie; Richard Haynes; Martin J Landray
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2020-07-17       Impact factor: 91.245

View more
  9 in total

1.  The Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio is Associated with the Requirement and the Duration of Invasive Mechanical Ventilation in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Patients: A Retrospective Study.

Authors:  Lijuan Yang; Chang Gao; Ying He; Xiaowan Wang; Ling Yang; Shiqi Guo; Jiahao Chen; Siyu He; Yuanxiao Sun; Ye Gao; Qiang Guo
Journal:  Can Respir J       Date:  2022-07-16       Impact factor: 2.130

2.  Characteristics, management, and prognosis of elderly patients with COVID-19 admitted in the ICU during the first wave: insights from the COVID-ICU study : Prognosis of COVID-19 elderly critically ill patients in the ICU.

Authors:  Martin Dres; David Hajage; Said Lebbah; Antoine Kimmoun; Tai Pham; Gaëtan Béduneau; Alain Combes; Alain Mercat; Bertrand Guidet; Alexandre Demoule; Matthieu Schmidt
Journal:  Ann Intensive Care       Date:  2021-05-14       Impact factor: 6.925

3.  What's new in ECMO for COVID-19?

Authors:  Graeme MacLaren; Alain Combes; Daniel Brodie
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2020-11-12       Impact factor: 17.440

4.  How COVID-19 will change the management of other respiratory viral infections.

Authors:  Yaseen M Arabi; Lennie P G Derde; Jean-François Timsit
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2021-08-11       Impact factor: 17.440

5.  Limitations of the ARDS criteria during high-flow oxygen or non-invasive ventilation: evidence from critically ill COVID-19 patients.

Authors:  Michael Hultström; Ola Hellkvist; Lucian Covaciu; Filip Fredén; Robert Frithiof; Miklós Lipcsey; Gaetano Perchiazzi; Mariangela Pellegrini
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2022-03-07       Impact factor: 9.097

6.  High-altitude is associated with better short-term survival in critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU.

Authors:  Katherine Simbaña-Rivera; Pablo R Morocho Jaramillo; Javier V Velastegui Silva; Lenin Gómez-Barreno; Ana B Ventimilla Campoverde; Juan F Novillo Cevallos; Washington E Almache Guanoquiza; Silvio L Cedeño Guevara; Luis G Imba Castro; Nelson A Moran Puerta; Alex W Guayta Valladares; Alex Lister; Esteban Ortiz-Prado
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-03-31       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 7.  Airway Pressure Release Ventilation With Time-Controlled Adaptive Ventilation (TCAV™) in COVID-19: A Community Hospital's Experience.

Authors:  Philippe Rola; Benjamin Daxon
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2022-04-05       Impact factor: 4.566

8.  What have we learned ventilating COVID-19 patients?

Authors:  Uriel Trahtemberg; Arthur S Slutsky; Jesús Villar
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2020-10-12       Impact factor: 17.440

Review 9.  Non-invasive ventilatory support and high-flow nasal oxygen as first-line treatment of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and ARDS.

Authors:  Domenico Luca Grieco; Salvatore Maurizio Maggiore; Oriol Roca; Elena Spinelli; Bhakti K Patel; Arnaud W Thille; Carmen Sílvia V Barbas; Marina Garcia de Acilu; Salvatore Lucio Cutuli; Filippo Bongiovanni; Marcelo Amato; Jean-Pierre Frat; Tommaso Mauri; John P Kress; Jordi Mancebo; Massimo Antonelli
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2021-07-07       Impact factor: 17.440

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.