| Literature DB >> 35989352 |
Luigi Vetrugno1,2, Daniele Orso3,4, Francesco Corradi5, Gianluca Zani6, Savino Spadaro7, Francesco Meroi3,4, Natascia D'Andrea3,4, Tiziana Bove3,4, Gianmaria Cammarota8,9, Edoardo De Robertis8,9, Samuele Ferrari5, Marcello Guarnieri10, Margherita Ajuti10, Maurizio Fusari6, Domenico Luca Grieco11, Cristian Deana4, Enrico Boero12, Federico Franchi13, Sabino Scolletta13, Salvatore Maurizio Maggiore14,15, Francesco Forfori5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Diaphragmatic dysfunction is a major factor responsible for weaning failure in patients that underwent prolonged invasive mechanical ventilation for acute severe respiratory failure from COVID-19. This study hypothesizes that ultrasound measured diaphragmatic thickening fraction (DTF) could provide corroborating information for weaning COVID-19 patients from mechanical ventilation.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; Diaphragm; Mechanical ventilation; Ultrasound; Weaning failure
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35989352 PMCID: PMC9392990 DOI: 10.1186/s12931-022-02138-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Respir Res ISSN: 1465-9921
Study population characteristics and group comparison between patients weaned successfully and unsuccessfully
| Population | Weaning failure | Weaning success | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N = 57 | N = 25 | N = 32 | ||
| Age [IQR] | 65.0 [56.0; 71.0] | 64.0 [57.0; 71.0] | 66.5 [55.8; 71.0] | 0.766 |
| Sex (male, %) | 42 (73.7%) | 17 (68.0%) | 25 (78.1%) | 0.577 |
| SAPS2 | 34.0 [31.0; 41.0] | 34.0 [32.0; 41.0] | 33.5 [31.0; 41.0] | 0.612 |
| RASS | − 1.00 [− 2.00; 0.00] | − 2.00 [− 2.00; − 1.00] | − 1.00 [− 2.00; 0.00] | 0.031 |
| KM score | 2.00 [1.00;3.00] | 2.00 [2.00;3.00] | 1.00 [1.00;2.00] | 0.002 |
| SAP (mmHg) | 133 [123; 149] | 130 [123; 140] | 140 [124; 151] | 0.227 |
| DAP (mmHg) | 70 [63; 80] | 68 [60; 73] | 76 [65; 82] | 0.096 |
| HR (bpm) | 78 [70; 90] | 82 [73; 90] | 77 [70; 90] | 0.541 |
| RR (bpm) | 18 [16; 23] | 22 [16; 24] | 18 [16; 21] | 0.302 |
| Body Temperature (°C) | 36.9 [36.5; 37.3] | 36.9 [36.7; 37.2] | 36.9 [36.5; 37.3] | 0.389 |
| SpO2 (%) | 98 [96; 99] | 98 [96; 99] | 98 [96; 99] | 0.915 |
| FiO2 | 0.40 [0.35; 0.50] | 0.45 [0.40; 0.50] | 0.40 [0.35; 0.45] | 0.033 |
| pH | 7.46 [7.43; 7.50] | 7.47 [7.42; 7.49] | 7.46 [7.43; 7.50] | 0.955 |
| PaCO2 (mmHg) | 43.0 [38.0; 48.0] | 43.0 [39.0; 48.0] | 41.5 [38.0; 47.2] | 0.562 |
| PaO2 (mmHg) | 85.0 [75.0; 106] | 84.0 [72.0; 96.0] | 92.0 [79.0; 115] | 0.215 |
| PaO2/FiO2 ratio (mmHg) | 216 [164; 280] | 176 [144; 231] | 241 [183; 308] | 0.032 |
| Lactates (mEq/L) | 1.10 [0.90; 1.40] | 1.10 [0.90; 1.31] | 1.10 [0.91; 1.43] | 0.981 |
| HCO3 (mEq/L) | 30.2 [27.9; 32.7] | 30.5 [27.9; 32.0] | 29.9 [27.7; 32.9] | 0.682 |
| BE | 6.70 [3.40; 8.90] | 7.00 [3.40; 8.10] | 6.45 [3.72; 9.00] | 0.930 |
| Diam exp. (mm) | 1.90 [1.50; 2.50] | 1.90 [1.50; 2.50] | 1.85 [1.50; 2.52] | 0.968 |
| Diam insp. (mm) | 2.40 [2.00; 3.20] | 2.60 [2.00; 3.60] | 2.40 [1.98; 3.20] | 0.484 |
| DTF (%) | 28.0 [21.7; 38.9] | 28.0 [16.7; 57.1] | 27.6 [22.1; 37.0] | 0.612 |
| Previous NIV | 46 (80.7%) | 23 (92.0%) | 23 (71.9%) | 0.090 |
| NIV Length (hours) | 15.0 [3.00; 36.0] | 20.0 [4.00; 36.0] | 7.00 [0.00; 37.0] | 0.248 |
| Mech. Vent. duration (days) | 14 [7; 22] | 15 [8; 24] | 13 [7; 22] | 0.670 |
| ICU LOS (days) | 20.0 [12.0; 31.0] | 27.0 [18.0; 37.0] | 16.5 [10.0; 27.5] | 0.025 |
| Hospital LOS (days) | 37.0 [28.0; 47.0] | 44.0 [29.0; 51.0] | 34.0 [26.8; 43.0] | 0.171 |
SAPS2 Simplified Acute Physiology Score 2, RASS Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale, KM score Kelly–Matthay score, SAP Systolic Arterial Pressure, DAP diastolic arterial pressure, HR heart rate, RR Respiratory Rate, BT Body Temperature, BE Base Excess, Diam exp. Expiratory Diaphragmatic Diameter, Diam insp. Inspiratory Diaphragmatic Diameter, DTF Diaphragmatic Thickening Fraction, Previous NIV Non-Invasive Ventilation trial before invasive mechanical ventilation, NIV Length NIV trial duration, Mech. Vent. Length invasive mechanical ventilation duration, ICU LOS ICU Length of Stay, Hosp LOS Hospital Length of Stay
Fig. 1DTF comparison between successfully weaned patients and those who failed weaning from mechanical ventilation. Although DTF medians are not significantly different (28% vs 27.6%; p = 0.612), higher outliers are found in patients who failed weaning
Fig. 2DTF distribution, with respect to PaO2/FiO2, in successfully weaned patients (in blue) and unsuccessfully (in red). The trend was obtained through a mixed linear regression model, which demonstrates a U-shaped trend in DTF values, lowest PaO2/FiO2 values at both extremes, for patients who failed weaning
Fig. 3Comparison of SAPS-2 scores (x-axis) and DTF values (y-axis), divided by gender (females on the left and males on the right) and PaO2/FiO2 ratio subclasses (highest values in green, lowest in red). As shown in the lower right quadrants of the graphs (highest SAPS-2 scores) DTF values are higher in males, compared to females, for each PaO2/FiO2 subclass