Dataset Information

Very Low Driving-Pressure Ventilation in Patients With COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Physiologic Study.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To determine in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) on venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) whether reducing driving pressure (ΔP) would decrease plasma biomarkers of inflammation and lung injury (interleukin-6 [IL-6], IL-8, and the soluble receptor for advanced glycation end-products sRAGE).

Design

A single-center prospective physiologic study.

Setting

At a single university medical center.

Participants

Adult patients with severe COVID-19 ARDS on VV ECMO.

Interventions

Participants on VV ECMO had the following biomarkers measured: (1) pre-ECMO with low-tidal-volume ventilation (LTVV), (2) post-ECMO with LTVV, (3) during low-driving-pressure ventilation (LDPV), (4) after 2 hours of very low driving-pressure ventilation (V-LDPV, main intervention ΔP = 1 cmH₂O), and (5) 2 hours after returning to LDPV.

Main measurements and results

Twenty-six participants were enrolled; 21 underwent V-LDPV. There was no significant change in IL-6, IL-8, and sRAGE from LDPV to V-LDPV and from V-LDPV to LDPV. Only participants (9 of 21) with nonspontaneous breaths had significant change (p < 0.001) in their tidal volumes (V_t) (mean ± SD), 1.9 ± 0.5, 0.1 ± 0.2, and 2.0 ± 0.7 mL/kg predicted body weight (PBW). Participants with spontaneous breathing, V_t were unchanged-4.5 ± 3.1, 4.7 ± 3.1, and 5.6 ± 2.9 mL/kg PBW (p = 0.481 and p = 0.065, respectively). There was no relationship found when accounting for V_t changes and biomarkers.

Conclusions

Biomarkers did not significantly change with decreased ΔPs or V_t changes during the first 24 hours post-ECMO. Despite deep sedation, reductions in V_t during V-LDPV were not reliably achieved due to spontaneous breaths. Thus, patients on VV ECMO for ARDS may have higher V_t (ie, transpulmonary pressure) than desired despite low ΔPs or V_t.

SUBMITTER: Odish M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9701579 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Very Low Driving-Pressure Ventilation in Patients With COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Physiologic Study.

Odish Mazen M Pollema Travis T Meier Angela A Hepokoski Mark M Yi Cassia C Spragg Roger R Patel Hemal H HH Alexander Laura E Crotty LEC Sun Xiaoying Shelly XS Jain Sonia S Simonson Tatum S TS Malhotra Atul A Owens Robert L RL

Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia 20221128 3

<h4>Objectives</h4>To determine in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) on venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) whether reducing driving pressure (ΔP) would decrease plasma biomarkers of inflammation and lung injury (interleukin-6 [IL-6], IL-8, and the soluble receptor for advanced glycation end-products sRAGE).<h4>Design</h4>A single-center prospective physiologic study.<h4>Setting</h4>At a single university medical center.<h4>Participants</h4>Adult patie ...[more]

PMID: 36567221

Similar Datasets

Project description:Patients on extracorporeal support for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome may require a prolonged period of deep sedation. In these patients, volatile sedation may represent a valid alternative to IV drugs. The aim of our study was to describe the feasibility of volatile sedation in a large cohort of acute respiratory distress syndrome patients undergoing venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and ultraprotective ventilation.DesignRetrospective monocentric study.SettingAdult ICU, ASST Monza, Italy.PatientsAdult patients who underwent volatile sedation with isoflurane during venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation between 2009 and 2019.InterventionsIsoflurane was delivered via the AnaConDa system. The sedation level, hemodynamics, and laboratory tests were compared between the volatile sedation phase and the IV sedation phases before and after the isoflurane sedation period.Measurements and main resultsAbout 74 patients (50 yr [43-56 yr]) were included. Median duration of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support was 22 days (14-51 d). Volatile sedation started on day 3 (2-6) of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support, and its median duration was 7 days (4-13 d), ranging from 1 to 38 days. A total of 970 venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation days were analyzed. During the volatile phase, the sedation level was slightly deeper (bispectral index 39 ± 6) compared with the IV phase before and after isoflurane (42 ± 8 and 43 ± 9, respectively, p < 0.001). Requirements of fentanyl and remifentanyl were reduced during the volatile phase. Minor differences in hemodynamics were observed during volatile sedation: mean arterial pressure was lower (75 ± 13 vs 79 ± 14 and 80 ± 15; p < 0.001), whereas cardiac output was higher (8.5 ± 1.9 vs 7.9 ± 1.8 and 8.0 ± 1.8; p = 0.003). Aspartate aminotransferase levels were lower during the volatile sedation phases (p < 0.001), whereas alanine aminotransferase, triglycerides, and creatine phosphokinase were more altered during the IV sedation phase before isoflurane (p < 0.001).ConclusionsVolatile sedation represents an alternative to IV agents to achieve long-term deep sedation in critically ill patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation undergoing ultraprotective ventilation.

Project description:BackgroundEven an ultraprotective ventilation strategy in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) might induce ventilator-induced lung injury and apneic ventilation with the sole application of positive end-expiratory pressure may, therefore, be an alternative ventilation strategy. We, therefore, compared the effects of ultraprotective ventilation with apneic ventilation on oxygenation, oxygen delivery, respiratory system mechanics, hemodynamics, strain, air distribution and recruitment of the lung parenchyma in ARDS patients with ECMO.MethodsIn a prospective, monocentric physiological study, 24 patients with severe ARDS managed with ECMO were ventilated using ultraprotective ventilation (tidal volume 3 ml/kg of predicted body weight) with a fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) of 21%, 50% and 90%. Patients were then treated with apneic ventilation with analogous FiO2. The primary endpoint was the effect of the ventilation strategy on oxygenation and oxygen delivery. The secondary endpoints were mechanical power, stress, regional air distribution, lung recruitment and the resulting strain, evaluated by chest computed tomography, associated with the application of PEEP (apneic ventilation) and/or low VT (ultraprotective ventilation).ResultsProtective ventilation, compared to apneic ventilation, improved oxygenation (arterial partial pressure of oxygen, p < 0.001 with FiO2 of 50% and 90%) and reduced cardiac output. Both ventilation strategies preserved oxygen delivery independent of the FiO2. Protective ventilation increased driving pressure, stress, strain, mechanical power, as well as induced additional recruitment in the non-dependent lung compared to apneic ventilation.ConclusionsIn patients with severe ARDS managed with ECMO, ultraprotective ventilation compared to apneic ventilation improved oxygenation, but increased stress, strain, and mechanical power. Apneic ventilation might be considered as one of the options in the initial phase of ECMO treatment in severe ARDS patients to facilitate lung rest and prevent ventilator-induced lung injury.Trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00013967). Registered 02/09/2018. https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00013967 .

Project description:Although extracorporeal membrane ventilation offers the possibility for low-frequency ventilation, protocols commonly used in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) vary largely. Whether strict adherence to low-frequency ventilation offers benefit on important outcome measures is poorly understood. Background/Objectives: This pilot clinical study investigated the efficacy of low-frequency ventilation on ventilator-free days (VFDs) in patients suffering from ARDS who were treated with ECMO therapy. Methods: In this single-center randomized controlled trial, 44 (70% male) successive ARDS patients treated with ECMO (aged 56 ± 12 years, SAPS III 64 (SD ± 14)) were randomly assigned 1:1 to the control group (conventional ventilation) or the treatment group (low-frequency ventilation during first 72 h on ECMO: respiratory rate 4-5/min; PEEP 14-16 cm H2O; plateau pressure 23-25 cm H2O, tidal volume: <4 mL/kg). The primary endpoint was VFDs at day 28 after starting ECMO treatment. The major secondary endpoint was ICU mortality, 28-day mortality and 90-day mortality. Results: Twenty-three (52%) patients were successfully weaned from ECMO and were discharged from the intensive care unit (ICU). Twelve patients in the treatment group and five patients in the control group showed more than one VFD at day 28 of ECMO treatment. VFDs were 3.0 (SD ± 5.5) days in the control group and 5.4 (SD ± 6) days in the treatment group (p = 0.117). Until day 28 of ECMO initiation, patients in the treatment group could be successfully weaned off of the ventilator more often (OR of 0.164 of 0 VFDs at day 28 after ECMO start; 95% CI 0.036-0.758; p = 0.021). ICU mortality did not differ significantly (36% in treatment group and 59% in control group; p = 0.227). Conclusions: Low-frequency ventilation is comparable to conventional protective ventilation in patients with ARDS who have been treated with ECMO. However, low-frequency ventilation may support weaning from invasive mechanical ventilation in patients suffering from ARDS and treated with ECMO therapy.

Dataset Information

Very Low Driving-Pressure Ventilation in Patients With COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Physiologic Study.

Objectives

Design

Setting

Participants

Interventions

Main measurements and results

Conclusions

Publications

Very Low Driving-Pressure Ventilation in Patients With COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Physiologic Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets