Effectiveness of dexmedetomidine combined with high flow nasal oxygen and long periods of awake prone positioning in moderate or severe COVID-19 pneumonia.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Taboada M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8011721 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Effectiveness of dexmedetomidine combined with high flow nasal oxygen and long periods of awake prone positioning in moderate or severe COVID-19 pneumonia.
Taboada Manuel M Baluja Aurora A Santos Laura Dos LD González Irene I Veiras Sonia S Caruezo Valentín V Naveira Alberto A Mirón Paula P Novoa Carmen C Doldán Patricia P Calvo Andrea A Tubio Ana A Selas Salomé S Eiras María M Martínez Adrián A Campaña Olga O Rodríguez María Teresa MT Diaz-Vieito María M Cariñena Agustín A Otero Pablo P Mariño Gumersindo G Domínguez María M Muniategui Ignacio I Aneiros Francisco F Alvarez Julián J
Journal of clinical anesthesia 20210331
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionSevere acute respiratory distress syndrome coronavirus disease-2 (SARS-CoV-2) can lead to acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) with possible multisystemic involvement. Ventilation/perfusion mismatch and shunt increase are critical determinants of hypoxemia. Understanding hypoxemia and the mechanisms involved in its genesis is essential to determine the optimal therapeutic strategy. High flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) and awake prone positioning (APP) in patients with COVID-19 AHRF showed promising benefits. The aim of this systematic review was to depict current situation around the combined use of HFNO and APP in patients with COVID-19 AHRF. Particularly, to investigate and report the pathophysiological rationale for adopting this strategy and to evaluate the (1) criteria for initiation, (2) timing, monitoring and discontinuation, and to assess the (3) impact of HFNO/ APP on outcome.MethodsWe performed a systematic search collecting the articles present in PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases with the following keywords: COVID-19 pneumonia, high flow nasal oxygen, awake prone position ventilation.ResultsThirteen studies displayed inclusion criteria and were included, accounting for 1242 patients who received HFNO/ APP. The combination of HFNO/ APP has an encouraging pathophysiological rationale for implementing this technique. The recognition of patients who can benefit from HFNO/ APP is difficult and there are no validated protocols to start, monitoring, and discontinue HFNO/ APP therapy. The most used method to monitor the efficacy and failure of this combined technique are oxygenation indexes, but discontinuation techniques are inconsistently and poorly described limiting possible generatability. Finally, this technique provided no clear benefits on outcome.ConclusionsOur systematic search provided positive feedbacks for improving the utilization of this combination technique, although we still need further investigation about methods to guide timing, management, and discontinuation, and to assess the intervention effect on outcome.
| S-EPMC9838094 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7251246 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAwake prone positioning (awake-PP) in non-intubated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients could avoid endotracheal intubation, reduce the use of critical care resources, and improve survival. We aimed to examine whether the combination of high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (HFNO) with awake-PP prevents the need for intubation when compared to HFNO alone.MethodsProspective, multicenter, adjusted observational cohort study in consecutive COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF) receiving respiratory support with HFNO from 12 March to 9 June 2020. Patients were classified as HFNO with or without awake-PP. Logistic models were fitted to predict treatment at baseline using the following variables: age, sex, obesity, non-respiratory Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, APACHE-II, C-reactive protein, days from symptoms onset to HFNO initiation, respiratory rate, and peripheral oxyhemoglobin saturation. We compared data on demographics, vital signs, laboratory markers, need for invasive mechanical ventilation, days to intubation, ICU length of stay, and ICU mortality between HFNO patients with and without awake-PP.ResultsA total of 1076 patients with COVID-19 ARF were admitted, of which 199 patients received HFNO and were analyzed. Fifty-five (27.6%) were pronated during HFNO; 60 (41%) and 22 (40%) patients from the HFNO and HFNO + awake-PP groups were intubated. The use of awake-PP as an adjunctive therapy to HFNO did not reduce the risk of intubation [RR 0.87 (95% CI 0.53-1.43), p = 0.60]. Patients treated with HFNO + awake-PP showed a trend for delay in intubation compared to HFNO alone [median 1 (interquartile range, IQR 1.0-2.5) vs 2 IQR 1.0-3.0] days (p = 0.055), but awake-PP did not affect 28-day mortality [RR 1.04 (95% CI 0.40-2.72), p = 0.92].ConclusionIn patients with COVID-19 ARF treated with HFNO, the use of awake-PP did not reduce the need for intubation or affect mortality.
| S-EPMC7537953 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7366175 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The awake prone position (AP) strategy for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a safe, simple, and cost-effective technique used to improve hypoxemia. We aimed to evaluate intubation and mortality risk in patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) who underwent AP during hospitalisation.In this retrospective, multicentre observational study conducted between May 1 and June 12, 2020 in 27 hospitals in Mexico and Ecuador, non-intubated patients with COVID-19 managed with AP or supine positioning were included to evaluate intubation and mortality risk through logistic regression models; multivariable and centre adjustment, propensity score analyses, and E-values were calculated to limit confounding. This study was registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04407468827 non-intubated patients with COVID-19 in the AP (n=505) and supine (n=322) groups were included for analysis. Less patients in the AP group required endotracheal intubation (23.6% versus 40.4%) or died (20% versus 37.9%). AP was a protective factor for intubation even after multivariable adjustment (OR=0.39, 95%CI: 0.28-0.56, p<0.0001, E-value=2.01), which prevailed after propensity score analysis (OR=0.32, 95%CI: 0.21-0.49, p<0.0001, E-value=2.21), and mortality (adjusted OR=0.38, 95%CI: 0.25-0.57, p<0.0001, E-value=1.98). The main variables associated with intubation amongst AP patients were increasing age, lower baseline SpO2/FiO2, and management with a non-rebreather mask.AP in hospitalised non-intubated patients with COVID-19 is associated with a lower risk of intubation and mortality.
| S-EPMC8576803 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn patients with COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure (ARF), awake prone positioning (AW-PP) reduces the need for intubation in patients treated with high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO). However, the effects of different exposure times on clinical outcomes remain unclear. We evaluated the effect of AW-PP on the risk of endotracheal intubation and in-hospital mortality in patients with COVID-19-related ARF treated with HFNO and analyzed the effects of different exposure times to AW-PP.MethodsThis multicenter prospective cohort study in six ICUs of 6 centers in Argentine consecutively included patients > 18 years of age with confirmed COVID-19-related ARF requiring HFNO from June 2020 to January 2021. In the primary analysis, the main exposure was awake prone positioning for at least 6 h/day, compared to non-prone positioning (NON-PP). In the sensitivity analysis, exposure was based on the number of hours receiving AW-PP. Inverse probability weighting-propensity score (IPW-PS) was used to adjust the conditional probability of treatment assignment. The primary outcome was endotracheal intubation (ETI); and the secondary outcome was hospital mortality.ResultsDuring the study period, 580 patients were screened and 335 were included; 187 (56%) tolerated AW-PP for [median (p25-75)] 12 (9-16) h/day and 148 (44%) served as controls. The IPW-propensity analysis showed standardized differences < 0.1 in all the variables assessed. After adjusting for other confounders, the OR (95% CI) for ETI in the AW-PP group was 0.36 (0.2-0.7), with a progressive reduction in OR as the exposure to AW-PP increased. The adjusted OR (95% CI) for hospital mortality in the AW-PP group ≥ 6 h/day was 0.47 (0.19-1.31). The exposure to prone positioning ≥ 8 h/d resulted in a further reduction in OR [0.37 (0.17-0.8)].ConclusionIn the study population, AW-PP for ≥ 6 h/day reduced the risk of endotracheal intubation, and exposure ≥ 8 h/d reduced the risk of hospital mortality.
| S-EPMC8740872 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Evidence exists for the use of high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) in the general critical care population for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. There is discord between guidelines for hypoxemia management in COVID-19. Both noninvasive management and intubation present risk to patients and staff and potentially overwhelm hospital mechanical ventilator capacity. The use of HFNO has been particularly controversial in the UK, with oxygen infrastructure failure. We discuss our experience of managing COVID-19 with HFNO and awake self-prone positioning. We focus upon the less-usual case of an eighteen-year-old female to illustrate the type of patient where HFNO may be used when perhaps earlier intubation once was. It is important to consider the wider implications of intubation. We have used HFNO as a bridge to intubation or as definitive management. As we await clinical trial evidence, HFNO with self-prone positioning has a role in COVID-19 for certain patients. Response parameters must be set and reviewed, oxygen infrastructure considered, and potential staff droplet exposure minimised.
| S-EPMC8142809 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To determine the effect of the awake prone position (APP) on gas exchange and the work of breathing in spontaneously breathing patients with COVID-19-associated acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) supported by high-flow nasal oxygen.DesignProspective randomized physiologic crossover multicenter trial.SettingsFour ICUs in Marseille, France.PatientsSeventeen patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia and Pao2/Fio2 less than or equal to 300 mm Hg while treated with high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy.InterventionsPeriods of APP and semirecumbent position (SRP) were randomly applied for 2 hours and separated by a 2-hour washout period.Measurements and main resultsArterial blood gases, end-tidal CO2. and esophageal pressure were recorded prior to and at the end of each period. Inspiratory muscle effort was assessed by measuring the esophageal pressure swing (∆PES) and the simplified esophageal pressure-time product (sPTPES). The other endpoints included physiologic dead space to tidal volume ratio (VD/VT) and the transpulmonary pressure swing. The APP increased the Pao2/Fio2 from 84 Torr (61-137 Torr) to 208 Torr (114-226 Torr) (p = 0.0007) and decreased both the VD/VT and the respiratory rate from 0.54 (0.47-0.57) to 0.49 (0.45-0.53) (p = 0.012) and from 26 breaths/min (21-30 breaths/min) to 21 breaths/min (19-22 breaths/min), respectively (p = 0.002). These variables remained unchanged during the SRP. The ∆PES and sPTPES per breath were unaffected by the position. However, the APP reduced the sPTPES per minute from 225 cm H2O.s.m-1 (176-332 cm H2O.s.m-1) to 174 cm H2O.s.m-1 (161-254 cm H2O.s.m-1) (p = 0.049).ConclusionsIn spontaneously breathing patients with COVID-19-associated AHRF supported by high-flow nasal oxygen, the APP improves oxygenation and reduces the physiologic dead space, respiratory rate, and work of breathing per minute.
| S-EPMC9760623 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAwake prone positioning (APP) has been widely used in non-intubated COVID-19 patients during the pandemic. However, high-quality evidence to support its use in severe COVID-19 patients in an intensive care unit (ICU) is inadequate. Therefore, we aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of APP for intubation requirements and other important outcomes in this patient population.MethodsWe searched for potentially relevant articles in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane database from inception to May 25, 2022. Studies focusing on COVID-19 adults in ICU who received APP compared to controls were included. The primary outcome was the intubation requirement. Secondary outcomes were mortality, ICU stay, and adverse events. Study quality was independently assessed, and we also conducted subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias to explore the potential influence factors.ResultsTen randomized controlled trials with 1,686 patients were eligible. The quality of the included studies was low to moderate. Overall, the intubation rate was 35.2% in the included patients. The mean daily APP duration ranged from <6 to 9 h, with poor adherence to APP protocols. When pooling, APP significantly reduced intubation requirement (risk ratio [RR] 0.84; 95%CI, 0.74-0.95; I 2 = 0%, P = 0.007). Subgroup analyses confirmed the reduced intubation rates in patients who were older (≥60 years), obese, came from a high mortality risk population (>20%), received HFNC/NIV, had lower SpO2/FiO2 (<150 mmHg), or undergone longer duration of APP (≥8 h). However, APP showed no beneficial effect on mortality (RR 0.92 [95% CI 0.77-1.10; I 2 = 0%, P = 0.37] and length of ICU stay (mean difference = -0.58 days; 95% CI, -2.49 to 1.32; I 2 = 63%; P = 0.55).ConclusionAPP significantly reduced intubation requirements in ICU patients with COVID-19 pneumonia without affecting the outcomes of mortality and ICU stay. Further studies with better APP protocol adherence will be needed to define the subgroup of patients most likely to benefit from this strategy.
| S-EPMC9500207 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10894415 | biostudies-literature