Prone positioning and neuromuscular blocking agents are part of standard care in severe ARDS patients: we are not sure

Associated Factors of High Sedative Requirements within Patients with Moderate to Severe COVID-19 ARDS

The coronavirus pandemic continues to challenge global healthcare. Severely affected patients are often in need of high doses of analgesics and sedatives. The latter was studied in critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in this prospective monocentric analysis. COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients admitted between 1 April and 1 December 2020 were enrolled in the study. A statistical analysis of impeded sedation using mixed-effect linear regression models was performed. Overall, 114 patients were enrolled, requiring unusual high levels of sedatives. During 67.9% of the observation period, a combination of sedatives was required in addition to continuous analgesia. During ARDS therapy, 85.1% (n = 97) underwent prone positioning. Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (vv-ECMO) was required in 20.2% (n = 23) of all patients. vv-ECMO patients showed significantly higher sedation needs (p < 0.001). Patients with hepatic (p = 0.01) or renal (p = 0.01) dysfunction showed significantly lower sedation requirements. Except for patient age (p = 0.01), we could not find any significant influence of pre-existing conditions. Age, vv-ECMO therapy and additional organ failure could be demonstrated as factors influencing sedation needs. Young patients and those receiving vv-ECMO usually require increased sedation for intensive care therapy. However, further studies are needed to elucidate the causes and mechanisms of impeded sedation.

High sedation needs of critically ill COVID-19 ARDS patients-A monocentric observational study

BACKGROUND

Therapy of severely affected coronavirus patient, requiring intubation and sedation is still challenging. Recently, difficulties in sedating these patients have been discussed. This study aims to describe sedation practices in patients with 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19)-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective monocentric analysis of sedation regimens in critically ill intubated patients with respiratory failure who required sedation in our mixed 32-bed university intensive care unit. All mechanically ventilated adults with COVID-19-induced ARDS requiring continuously infused sedative therapy admitted between April 4, 2020, and June 30, 2020 were included. We recorded demographic data, sedative dosages, prone positioning, sedation levels and duration. Descriptive data analysis was performed; for additional analysis, a logistic regression with mixed effect was used.

RESULTS

In total, 56 patients (mean age 67 (±14) years) were included. The mean observed sedation period was 224 (±139) hours. To achieve the prescribed sedation level, we observed the need for two or three sedatives in 48.7% and 12.8% of the cases, respectively. In cases with a triple sedation regimen, the combination of clonidine, esketamine and midazolam was observed in most cases (75.7%). Analgesia was achieved using sufentanil in 98.6% of the cases. The analysis showed that the majority of COVID-19 patients required an unusually high sedation dose compared to those available in the literature.

CONCLUSION

The global pandemic continues to affect patients severely requiring ventilation and sedation, but optimal sedation strategies are still lacking. The findings of our observation suggest unusual high dosages of sedatives in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19. Prescribed sedation levels appear to be achievable only with several combinations of sedatives in most critically ill patients suffering from COVID-19-induced ARDS and a potential association to the often required sophisticated critical care including prone positioning and ECMO treatment seems conceivable.

Volatile Isoflurane in Critically Ill Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients-A Case Series and Systematic Review

Objectives:

The ongoing coronavirus pandemic is challenging, especially in severely affected patients who require intubation and sedation. Although the potential benefits of sedation with volatile anesthetics in coronavirus disease 2019 patients are currently being discussed, the use of isoflurane in patients with coronavirus disease 2019–induced acute respiratory distress syndrome has not yet been reported.

Design:

We performed a retrospective analysis of critically ill patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation.

Setting:

The study was conducted with patients admitted between April 4 and May 15, 2020 to our ICU.

Patients:

We included five patients who were previously diagnosed with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection.

Intervention:

Even with high doses of several IV sedatives, the targeted level of sedation could not be achieved. Therefore, the sedation regimen was switched to inhalational isoflurane. Clinical data were recorded using a patient data management system. We recorded demographical data, laboratory results, ventilation variables, sedative dosages, sedation level, prone positioning, duration of volatile sedation and outcomes.

Measurements & Main Results:

Mean age (four men, one women) was 53.0 (± 12.7) years. The mean duration of isoflurane sedation was 103.2 (± 66.2) hours. Our data demonstrate a substantial improvement in the oxygenation ratio when using isoflurane sedation. Deep sedation as assessed by the Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale was rapidly and closely controlled in all patients, and the subsequent discontinuation of IV sedation was possible within the first 30 minutes. No adverse events were detected.

Conclusions:

Our findings demonstrate the feasibility of isoflurane sedation in five patients suffering from severe coronavirus disease 2019 infection. Volatile isoflurane was able to achieve the required deep sedation and reduced the need for IV sedation.

Neuromuscular blocking agents for acute respiratory distress syndrome

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is an acute inflammatory process that impairs the ability of the lungs to oxygenate thereby resulting in respiratory failure. Treatment of ARDS is often a multimodal approach using both nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic treatment strategies in addition to trying to reverse the underlying cause of ARDS. Neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) have been prescribed to patients with ARDS as they are thought to decrease inflammation, oxygen consumption, and cardiac output and help facilitate ventilator synchrony. NMBAs have only been evaluated in patients with early, severe ARDS in three multicenter, randomized, controlled trials (n = 432), but have resulted in decreased inflammation and improved oxygenation, ventilator-free days, and mortality. Despite reports of NMBAs being associated with adverse effects like postparalytic quadriparesis, myopathy, and prolonged recovery, these effects have not been seen in patients receiving short courses of NMBAs for ARDS. A large multicenter, prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled trial is ongoing to confirm benefit of NMBAs in early, severe ARDS when adjusting for limitations of the previous studies. The current available literature suggests that 48 h of NMBA therapy in patients with early, severe ARDS improves mortality, without resulting in additional patient harm.

Beyond Low Tidal Volume Ventilation: Treatment Adjuncts for Severe Respiratory Failure in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

OBJECTIVES

Despite decades of research, the acute respiratory distress syndrome remains associated with significant morbidity and mortality. This Concise Definitive Review provides a practical and evidence-based summary of treatments in addition to low tidal volume ventilation and their role in the management of severe respiratory failure in acute respiratory distress syndrome.

DATA SOURCES

We searched the PubMed database for clinical trials, observational studies, and review articles describing treatment adjuncts in acute respiratory distress syndrome patients, including high positive end-expiratory pressure strategies, recruitment maneuvers, high-frequency oscillatory ventilation, neuromuscular blockade, prone positioning, inhaled pulmonary vasodilators, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, glucocorticoids, and renal replacement therapy.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Results were reviewed by the primary author in depth. Disputed findings and conclusions were then reviewed with the other authors until consensus was achieved.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Severe respiratory failure in acute respiratory distress syndrome may present with refractory hypoxemia, severe respiratory acidosis, or elevated plateau airway pressures despite lung-protective ventilation according to acute respiratory distress syndrome Network protocol. For severe hypoxemia, first-line treatment adjuncts include high positive end-expiratory pressure strategies, recruitment maneuvers, neuromuscular blockade, and prone positioning. For refractory acidosis, we recommend initial modest liberalization of tidal volumes, followed by neuromuscular blockade and prone positioning. For elevated plateau airway pressures, we suggest first decreasing tidal volumes, followed by neuromuscular blockade, modification of positive end-expiratory pressure, and prone positioning. Therapies such as inhaled pulmonary vasodilators, glucocorticoids, and renal replacement therapy have significantly less evidence in favor of their use and should be considered second line. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation may be life-saving in selected patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome but should be used only when other alternatives have been applied.

CONCLUSIONS

Severe respiratory failure in acute respiratory distress syndrome often necessitates the use of treatment adjuncts. Evidence-based application of these therapies in acute respiratory distress syndrome remains a significant challenge. However, a rational stepwise approach with frequent monitoring for improvement or harm can be achieved.

[The old man and the I sea U : Essay on faith, fate and evidence - after the manner of Hemingway]

Robert Bartlett, emeritus Professor of surgery at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, USA, transformed classical works of world literature (Charles Dickens: A Christmas Carol, Lewis Carroll: Alice in Wonderland) into teaching aids for advanced training in intensive care medicine. He recently turned his hand to the well-known work of Ernest Hemingway: the Nobel Prize winning novel The Old Man and the Sea. Subsequent to Robert Bartlett's essay this article provides background information and comments on the current problems in modern intensive care medicine addressed in his essay.

Perceived safety and efficacy of neuromuscular blockers for acute respiratory distress syndrome among medical intensive care unit practitioners: A multicenter survey

PURPOSE

Neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) are frequently used in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The purpose of this survey is to describe providers' knowledge and perceived efficacy and safety of NMBAs in patients with ARDS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a prospective, multicenter survey of medical intensive care unit intensivists, fellows, nurse practitioners (NPs), physician's assistants (PAs), and pharmacists at 5 tertiary care centers between July 2012 and May 2013.

RESULTS

A total of 335 surveys were sent to providers, with a 47% response rate. Ninety-eight percent of providers correctly identified that NMBAs lack anxiolytic and analgesic properties. The effect of end-organ damage on NMBA clearance was less commonly identified by NPs/PAs for both hepatic (P=.0077) and renal (P=.0272) dysfunction compared with physicians. More NP/PAs identified the association of consciousness with the use of NMBAs than physicians (P=.047). Forty-two percent of prescribers reported always or frequently using continuous-infusion NMBAs in patients with severe ARDS, with 89% initiating NMBAs because of ventilator dyssynchrony. Prescribers perceived continuous NMBAs to be more effective than inhaled prostaglandins (74% vs 56%) in severe ARDS but less safe (45% vs 84%). Train of 4 was identified by 54% of prescribers as their primary method for titration.

CONCLUSION

Providers are knowledgeable about NMBAs, but educational opportunities exist. Perceptions about the efficacy and safety of NMBAs varied among prescribers, and inconsistencies existed in the prioritization of management strategies for ARDS.

[Pain, agitation and delirium in acute respiratory failure]

Avoiding pain, agitation and delirium as well as avoiding unnecessary deep sedation is a powerful yet challenging strategy in critical care medicine. A number of interactions between cerebral function and respiratory function should be regarded in patients with respiratory failure and mechanical ventilation. A cooperative sedation strategy (i.e. patient is awake and free of pain and delirium) is feasible in many patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. Especially patients with mild acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) seem to benefit from preserved spontaneous breathing. While completely disabling spontaneous ventilation with or without neuromuscular blockade is not a standard strategy in ARDS, it might be temporarily required in patients with severe ARDS, who have substantial dyssynchrony or persistent hypoxaemia. Since pain, agitation and delirium compromise respiratory function they should also be regarded during noninvasive ventilation and during ventilator weaning. Pharmacological sedation can have favourable effects in these situations, but should not be given routinely or uncritically.