Early awake proning in critical and severe COVID-19 patients undergoing noninvasive respiratory support: A retrospective multicenter cohort study

Conscious prone positioning in nonintubated COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the effect of the prone position on endotracheal intubation and mortality in nonintubated COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome.

METHODS

We registered the protocol (CRD42021286711) and searched for four databases and gray literature from inception to December 31, 2022. We included observational studies and clinical trials. There was no limit by date or the language of publication. We excluded case reports, case series, studies not available in full text, and those studies that included children < 18-years-old.

RESULTS

We included ten observational studies, eight clinical trials, 3,969 patients, 1,120 endotracheal intubation events, and 843 deaths. All of the studies had a low risk of bias (Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Risk of Bias 2 tools). We found that the conscious prone position decreased the odds of endotracheal intubation by 44% (OR 0.56; 95%CI 0.40 - 0.78) and mortality by 43% (OR 0.57; 95%CI 0.39 - 0.84) in nonintubated COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. This protective effect on endotracheal intubation and mortality was more robust in those who spent > 8 hours/day in the conscious prone position (OR 0.43; 95%CI 0.26 - 0.72 and OR 0.38; 95%CI 0.24 - 0.60, respectively). The certainty of the evidence according to the GRADE criteria was moderate.

CONCLUSION

The conscious prone position decreased the odds of endotracheal intubation and mortality, especially when patients spent over 8 hours/day in the conscious prone position and treatment in the intensive care unit. However, our results should be cautiously interpreted due to limitations in evaluating randomized clinical trials, nonrandomized clinical trials and observational studies. However, despite systematic reviews with meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials, we must keep in mind that these studies remain heterogeneous from a clinical and methodological point of view.

Awake pronation with helmet CPAP in early COVID-19 ARDS patients: effects on respiratory effort and distribution of ventilation assessed by EIT

Prone positioning with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is widely used for respiratory support in awake patients with COVID-19-associated acute respiratory failure. We aimed to assess the respiratory mechanics and distribution of ventilation in COVID-19-associated ARDS treated by CPAP in awake prone position. We studied 16 awake COVID-19 patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS. The study protocol consisted of a randomized sequence of supine and prone position with imposed positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) of 5 and 10 cmH2O delivered by helmet CPAP. Respiratory mechanics and distribution of ventilation were assessed through esophageal pressure (PES) and electrical impedance tomography (EIT). At the end of each 20-min phase, arterial blood gas analysis was performed, and PES swing and EIT tracings were recorded for the calculation of the respiratory mechanics and regional ventilation. The patient's position had no significant effects on respiratory mechanics. EIT analysis did not detect differences among global indices of ventilation. A significant proportion of pixels in the sternal region of interest showed an increase in compliance from the supine to prone position and PaO2/FIO2 increased accordingly. The best improvement of both PaO2/FIO2 and sternal compliance was obtained in the prone position with PEEP 10 cmH2O. In the studied subjects, prone positioning during CPAP treatment raised oxygenation without improvement of "protective" ventilation or global ventilatory inhomogeneity indices. Prone positioning with higher PEEP significantly increased the compliance of sternal regions.

Awake prone positioning for patients with COVID-19-related respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The role of awake prone positioning (aPP) in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure is debated. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the role of aPP in acute respiratory failure related to COronaVIrus Disease-19 (COVID-19). Studies reporting on the clinical course of patients with acute respiratory failure related to COVID-19 treated or not treated by aPP were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis (ProsperoID: CRD42022333211). The primary study outcome was the composite of in-hospital death or orotracheal intubation; the individual components of the primary outcome were secondary study outcomes. The composite of in-hospital death or orotracheal intubation was available for 6 studies (1884 patients), five randomized and one prospective; a significant reduction in the risk of this outcome was observed in patients treated vs. not treated by aPP (33.5% vs. 39.8%; OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.60-0.89; I2 0%). In-hospital death was reported in 34 studies (6808 patients) and occurred in 17.4% vs. 23.5% of patients treated or not treated with aPP (random effect OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.46-0.79; I2 59%); orotracheal intubation was observed in 25.8% vs. 32.7% of patients treated or not treated with aPP (27 studies, 5369 patients; random effect OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.56-1.27; I2 84%). aPP reduces the risk for death or orotracheal intubation in patients with acute respiratory failure related to COVID-19. Further studies should be conducted to confirm the clinical benefit of aPP outside the ICU.Registration Prospero ID: CRD42022333211.

Prone positioning during CPAP therapy in SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia: a concise clinical review

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of patients with hypoxemic acute respiratory failure (ARF) due to SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia threatened to overwhelm intensive care units. To reduce the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), clinicians tried noninvasive strategies to manage ARF, including the use of awake prone positioning (PP) with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). In this article, we review the patho-physiologic rationale, clinical effectiveness and practical issues of the use of PP during CPAP in non-intubated, spontaneously breathing patients affected by SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia with ARF. Use of PP during CPAP appears to be safe and feasible and may have a lower rate of adverse events compared to IMV. A better response to PP is observed among patients in early phases of acute respiratory distress syndrome. While PP during CPAP may improve oxygenation, the impact on the need for intubation and mortality remains unclear. It is possible to speculate on the role of PP during CPAP in terms of improvement of ventilation mechanics and reduction of strain stress.

Effect of awake prone positioning on tracheal intubation rates in patients with COVID-19: A meta-analysis

Purpose

We investigated the effect of awake prone positioning on endotracheal intubation rates in spontaneously breathing patients with COVID-19 not undergoing endotracheal intubation.

Methods

We searched the CINAHL, Cochrane Library, PUBMED, MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases until December 31, 2022. Prospective randomized controlled, cohort, and case-control studies were included. A meta-analysis was performed on the primary outcome measure, tracheal intubation rates, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

Results

Ten studies with a total of 2641 patients were included. The tracheal intubation rate in the awake prone position was 34% (95%CI: 0.59-1.10; P = 0.18; I2 = 55%), showing a non-significant benefit. Mortality was lower in prone-positioned than in supine-positioned patients (odds ratio: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.61-0.93; P = 0.007; I2 = 46%), prone positioning significantly improved the PaO2/FiO2 ratio (mean difference -29.17; 95%CI: -50.91 to -7.43; P = 0.009; I2 = 44%).

Conclusions

Prone positioning can improve the PaO2/FIO2 ratio in patients with COVID-19 but we found no significant effect on tracheal intubation rates. Awake prone positioning seems to be associated with lower mortality, however, and may thus be a beneficial and effective intervention for patients with COVID-19. The optimal timing, duration, and target population need to be determined in future studies.

Awake prone positioning for non-intubated patients with COVID-19-related acute hypoxic respiratory failure: a systematic review based on eight high-quality randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Awake prone positioning has been widely used in non-intubated patients with acute hypoxic respiratory failure (AHRF) due to COVID-19, but the evidence is mostly from observational studies and low-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs), with conflicting results from published studies. A systematic review of published high-quality RCTs to resolve the controversy over the efficacy and safety of awake prone positioning in non-intubated patients with AHRF due to COVID-19.

METHODS

Candidate studies were identified through searches of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, Embase, Scopus databases from December 1, 2019 to November 1, 2022. Literature screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were independently conducted by two researchers.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs involving 2657 patients were included. Meta-analysis of fixed effects models showed that awake prone positioning did not increase mortality(OR = 0.88, 95%CI [0.72, 1.08]), length of stay in ICU (WMD = 1.14, 95%CI [-0.45, 2.72]), total length of stay (WMD = 0.11, 95%CI [-1.02, 1.23]), or incidence of adverse events (OR = 1.02, 95%CI [0.79, 1.31]) compared with usual care, but significantly reduced the intubation rate (OR = 0.72, 95%CI [0.60, 0.86]). Similar results were found in a subgroup analysis of patients who received only high flow nasal cannula (Mortality: OR = 0.86, 95%CI [0.70, 1.05]; Intubation rate: OR = 0.69, 95%CI [0.58, 0.83]). All eight RCTs had high quality of evidence, which ensured the reliability of the meta-analysis results.

CONCLUSIONS

Awake prone positioning is safe and feasible in non-intubated patients with AHRF caused by COVID-19, and can significantly reduce the intubation rate. More studies are needed to explore standardized implementation strategies for the awake prone positioning.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CRD42023394113.

Awake Prone Decubitus Positioning in COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and MetaAnalysis

To date, recommendations for the implementation of awake prone positioning in patients with hypoxia secondary to SARSCoV2 infection have been extrapolated from prior studies on respiratory distress. Thus, we carried out a systematic review and metaanalysis to evaluate the benefits of pronation on the oxygenation, need for endotracheal intubation (ETI), and mortality of this group of patients. We carried out a systematic search in the PubMed and Embase databases between June 2020 and November 2021. A randomeffects metaanalysis was performed to evaluate the impact of pronation on the ETI and mortality rates. A total of 213 articles were identified, 15 of which were finally included in this review. A significant decrease in the mortality rate was observed in the group of pronated patients (relative risk [RR] = 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.480.99; p = 0.044), but no significant effect was observed on the need for ETI (RR = 0.79; 95% CI: 0.631.00; p = 0.051). However, a subgroup analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) did reveal a significant decrease in the need for this intervention (RR = 0.83; 95% CI: 0.710.97). Prone positioning was found to significantly reduce mortality, also diminishing the need for ETI, although this effect was statistically significant only in the subgroup analysis of RCTs. Patients' response to awake prone positioning could be greater when this procedure is implemented early and in combination with noninvasive mechanical ventilation (NIMV) or highflow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy.

Efficacy and safety of prone position in COVID-19 patients with respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Prone position has already been demonstrated to improve survival in non-COVID acute respiratory distress syndrome and has been widely performed in COVID-19 patients with respiratory failure, both in non-intubated and intubated patients. However, the beneficial effect of the prone position in COVID-19 pneumonia still remains controversial. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the prone position compared with the non-prone in non-intubated and intubated COVID-19 patients, respectively.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases, as well as one Korean domestic database, on July 9, 2021, and updated the search 9 times to September 14, 2022. Studies that compared prone and non-prone positions in patients with COVID-19 were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcomes were mortality, need for intubation, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Of the 1259 records identified, 9 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 23 nonrandomized studies (NRSs) were eligible. In the non-intubated patients, the prone position reduced the intubation rate compared with the non-prone position in 6 RCTs (n = 2156, RR 0.81, P = 0.0002) and in 18 NRSs (n = 3374, RR 0.65, P = 0.002). In the subgroup analysis according to the oxygen delivery method, the results were constant only in the HFNC or NIV subgroup. For mortality, RCTs reported no difference between prone and non-prone groups, but in NRSs, the prone position had a significant advantage in mortality [18 NRSs, n = 3361, relative risk (RR) 0.56, P < 0.00001] regardless of the oxygen delivery methods shown in the subgroup analysis. There was no RCT for intubated patients, and mortality did not differ between the prone and non-prone groups in NRSs. Adverse events reported in both the non-intubated and intubated groups were mild and similar between the prone and non-intubated groups.

CONCLUSION

For non-intubated patients with COVID-19, prone positioning reduced the risk of intubation, particularly in patients requiring a high-flow oxygen system. However, the survival benefit was unclear between the prone and non-prone groups. There was insufficient evidence to support the beneficial effects of prone positioning in intubated patients. Trial registration This study was registered in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews on February 16, 2022 (Registration No.: CRD42022311150 ).

Clinical Characterization of the Three Waves of COVID-19 Occurring in Southern Italy: Results of a Multicenter Cohort Study

AIMS

To characterize patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in the three waves in Southern Italy.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter observational cohort study involving seventeen COVID-19 Units in Campania, southern Italy: All adult (≥18 years) patients, hospitalized with a diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection from 28 February 2020 to 31 May 2021, were enrolled.

RESULTS

Two thousand and fifteen COVID-19 hospitalized patients were enrolled; 392 (19%) in the first wave, 917 (45%) in the second and 706 (35%) in the third wave. Patients showed a less severe clinical outcome in the first wave than in the second and third waves (73%, 65% and 72%, respectively; p = 0.003), but hospitalization expressed in days was longer in the first wave [Median (Q1-Q3): 17 (13-25) v.s. 14 (9-21) and 14 (9-19), respectively, p = 0.001)] and also mortality during hospitalization was higher in the first wave than in the second and third waves: 16.6% v.s. 11.3% and 6.5%, respectively (p = 0.0001). Multivariate analysis showed that older age [OR: 1.069, CI (1046-1092); p = 0.001], a worse Charlson comorbidity index [OR: 1042, CI (1233-1594; p = 0.0001] and enrolment during the first-wave [OR: 1.917, CI (1.054-3.485; p = 0.033] were predictors of mortality in hospitalized patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Improved organization of the healthcare facilities and the increase in knowledge of clinical and therapeutic management have contributed to a trend in the reduction in mortality during the three waves of COVID-19.

Awake prone positioning for patients with COVID-19-induced acute hypoxemic respiratory failure

Whereas prone positioning of intubated patients suffering from acute respiratory distress syndrome represents the standard of care, proning non-intubated patients, so-called "awake prone positioning (APP)," has only recently gained popularity and undergone scientific evaluation. In this review, we summarize current evidence on physiological and clinical effects of APP on patients' centered outcomes, such as intubation and mortality, the safety of the technique, factors and predictors of success, practical issues for optimal implementation, and future areas of research. Current evidence supports using APP among patients suffering from acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 and undergoing advanced respiratory support, such as high-flow nasal cannula, in an intensive care unit setting. Healthcare teams should aim to prone patients at least 8 h daily. Future research should focus on optimizing the tolerance of the technique and comprehensively evaluating benefits in other patient populations.

Effect of Awake Prone Positioning in non-Intubated COVID-19 Patients with Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Awake prone positioning (APP) has been considered as a feasible treatment for patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure in non-intubated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the efficacy and safety of APP remain uncertain. This meta-analysis aims to assess the effect of APP on intubation rate and mortality in COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure.

Methods

Relevant studies published from January 1, 2020, to June 17, 2022, were systematically searched. The primary outcomes were the intubation rate and mortality; the secondary outcome was the incidence of adverse events.

Results

Of 5746 identified publications, 22 were eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis (N = 5146 patients). In comparison to the non-APP group, APP could decrease the intubation rates (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.48-0.83; P = .001), particularly in the subgroup of the daily median duration of APP > 8 h and in the subgroup of receiving high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) or non-invasive ventilation (NIV). Patients treated with APP were associated with lower mortality rates (OR 0.61; 95% CI 0.45-0.81; P = .0008), but no mortality benefit was found in the APP group in the subgroup of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). No significant difference was found in the incidence of adverse events between the groups (OR 1.13; 95% CI 0.75-1.71; P = .56).

Conclusion

Our results demonstrated that APP could be an effective strategy to avoid intubation without detrimental effects in non-intubated patients with COVID-19, especially for patients requiring HFNC or NIV, and the daily APP duration with the target of minimally eight hours was suggested. In the subgroup of RCTs, the pooled results did not demonstrate any benefit of APP on mortality. Given the limited number of RCTs, further high-quality RCTs are needed to confirm the results.

INPLASY registration number

INPLASY2021110037.

Awake Prone-Positioning in Patients on Non-Invasive Ventilation for Management of SARS-CoV-2 Pneumonia: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Patients with corona virus disease-19 (COVID-19)-induced acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) are often on non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and use of awake prone positioning (PP) may pose concern in terms of feasibility, efficacy and side effects. This systematic review was undertaken to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of awake PP along with NIV in them.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted from the inception of COVID-19 until 15 August 2021. Various factors including feasibility, interface used, outcome, efficacy, side effects and limitations in both intensive care unit (ICU) and Non-ICU setups were noted.

RESULTS

A total of 12 original articles and six case series including 359 patients were involved. Out of it, 40% (n = 122) of patients were in ICU and 60% (n = 237) in Non-ICU areas. Four clinical studies and four case series including 114 patients had evaluated PP along with helmet continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). All had found PP with helmet CPAP to be feasible and efficacious; however, only one study documented the sustained improvement in oxygenation i.e., 12 h after PP.

CONCLUSIONS

The present systematic review observed moderate to serious risk of bias amongst the included studies along with heterogeneity in terms of varied respiratory support amongst patients. However, the use of awake PP in patients on NIV has been found to be feasible and efficacious with no adverse events.

Detailed Changes in Oxygenation following Awake Prone Positioning for Non-Intubated Patients with COVID-19 and Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure—A Historical Cohort Study

Few studies have reported on the effectiveness of awake prone therapy in the clinical course of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients. This study aimed to investigate the effects of awake prone therapy during spontaneous breathing on the improvement of oxygenation over 3 weeks for COVID-19 acute respiratory failure. Data of consecutive COVID-19 patients with lung disorder with a fraction of inspired oxygen (FIO2) ≥ 0.4 and without tracheal intubation were analyzed. We examined changes in SpO2/FIO2, ROX index ((SpO2/FIO2)/respiratory rate) and the seven-category ordinal scale after the initiation of FIO2 ≥ 0.4 and compared these changes between patients who did and did not receive prone therapy. Of 58 patients, 27 received awake prone therapy, while 31 did not. Trend relationships between time course and change in SpO2/FIO2 and ROX index were observed in both groups, although a significant interaction in the relationship was noted between prone therapy and change in SpO2/FIO2 and ROX index. The seven-category ordinal scale also revealed a trend relationship with time course in the prone therapy group. The awake prone therapy was significantly associated with a lower rate of tracheal intubation. In patients with COVID-19 pneumonia treated with FIO2 ≥ 0.4, awake prone therapy may improve oxygenation within two weeks.

Effect of Prone Positioning on Clinical Outcomes of Non-Intubated Subjects With COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Awake prone positioning (APP) has been recently proposed as an adjunctive treatment for non-intubated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients requiring oxygen therapy to improve oxygenation and reduce the risk of intubation. However, the magnitude of the effect of APP on clinical outcomes in these patients remains uncertain. We performed a comparative systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of APP to improve the clinical outcomes in non-intubated subjects with COVID-19.

METHODS

The primary outcomes were the need for endotracheal intubation and mortality. The secondary outcome was hospital length of stay. Pooled risk ratio (RR) and mean difference with the corresponding 95% CI were obtained by the Mantel-Haenszel method within a random-effect model.

RESULTS

A total of 14 studies (5 randomized controlled trials [RCTs] and 9 observational studies) involving 3,324 subjects (1,495 received APP and 1,829 did not) were included. There was a significant reduction in the mortality rate in APP group compared to control (RR 0.68 [95% CI 0.51-0.90]; P = .008, I² = 52%) with no significant effect on intubation (RR 0.85 [95% CI 0.66-1.08]; P = .17, I² = 63%) or hospital length of stay (mean difference -3.09 d [95% CI-10.14-3.96]; P = .39, I² = 97%). Subgroup analysis of RCTs showed significant reduction in intubation rate (RR 0.83 [95% CI 0.72-0.97]; P = .02, I² = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

APP has the potential to reduce the in-hospital mortality rate in COVID-19 subjects with hypoxemia without a significant effect on the need for intubation or length of hospital stay. However, there was a significant decrease in the need for intubation on subgroup analysis of RCTs. More large-scale trials with a standardized protocol for prone positioning are needed to better evaluate its effectiveness in this select population.

Breathing face down

The prone position has been used to improve oxygenation in patients affected by acute respiratory distress syndrome, but its role in patients with COVID-19 is still unclear when these patients are breathing spontaneously. Mechanisms of ventilation and perfusion in the prone position are discussed, with new insights on how these changes relate to patients with COVID-19.

Prone positioning for non-intubated spontaneously breathing patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Prone positioning in non-intubated spontaneously breathing patients is becoming widely applied in practice alongside noninvasive respiratory support. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the effect, timing, and populations that might benefit from awake proning regarding oxygenation, mortality, and tracheal intubation compared with supine position in hypoxaemic acute respiratory failure.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, CINAHL, and BMJ Best Practice until August 2021 (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews [PROSPERO] registration: CRD42021250322). Studies included comprise least-wise 20 adult patients with hypoxaemic respiratory failure secondary to acute respiratory distress syndrome or coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed, and study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies fulfilled the selection criteria and 2352 patients were included; of those patients, 99% (n=2332/2352) had COVID-19. Amongst 1041 (44%) patients who were placed in the prone position, 1021 were SARS-CoV-2 positive. The meta-analysis revealed significant improvement in the PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio (mean difference -23.10; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -34.80 to 11.39; P=0.0001; I²=26%) after prone positioning. In patients with COVID-19, lower mortality was found in the group placed in the prone position (150/771 prone vs 391/1457 supine; odds ratio [OR] 0.51; 95% CI: 0.32-0.80; P=0.003; I²=48%), but the tracheal intubation rate was unchanged (284/824 prone vs 616/1271 supine; OR 0.72; 95% CI: 0.43-1.22; P=0.220; I²=75%). Overall proning was tolerated for a median of 4 h (inter-quartile range: 2-16).

CONCLUSIONS

Prone positioning can improve oxygenation amongst non-intubated patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure when applied for at least 4 h over repeated daily episodes. Awake proning appears safe, but the effect on tracheal intubation rate and survival remains uncertain.

Prone position in COVID 19-associated acute respiratory failure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Prone position has been widely used in the COVID-19 pandemic, with an extension of its use in patients with spontaneous breathing ('awake prone'). We herein propose a review of the current literature on prone position in mechanical ventilation and while spontaneous breathing in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia or COVID-19 ARDS.

RECENT FINDINGS

A literature search retrieved 70 studies separating whether patient was intubated (24 studies) or nonintubated (46 studies). The outcomes analyzed were intubation rate, mortality and respiratory response to prone. In nonintubated patient receiving prone position, the main finding was mortality reduction in ICU and outside ICU setting.

SUMMARY

The final results of the several randomized control trials completed or ongoing are needed to confirm the trend of these results. In intubated patients, observational studies showed that responders to prone in terms of oxygenation had a better survival than nonresponders.

Awake prone positioning and oxygen therapy in patients with COVID-19: the APRONOX study

BACKGROUND

The awake prone positioning strategy for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome is a safe, simple and cost-effective technique used to improve hypoxaemia. We aimed to evaluate intubation and mortality risk in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who underwent awake prone positioning during hospitalisation.

METHODS

In this retrospective, multicentre observational study conducted between 1 May 2020 and 12 June 2020 in 27 hospitals in Mexico and Ecuador, nonintubated patients with COVID-19 managed with awake prone or awake 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.

RESULTS

827 nonintubated patients with COVID-19 in the awake prone (n=505) and awake supine (n=322) groups were included for analysis. Fewer patients in the awake prone group required endotracheal intubation (23.6% versus 40.4%) or died (19.8% versus 37.3%). Awake prone positioning was a protective factor for intubation even after multivariable adjustment (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.24-0.52; p<0.0001, E=2.12), which prevailed after propensity score analysis (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.27-0.62; p<0.0001, E=1.86) and mortality (adjusted OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.26-0.55; p<0.0001, E=2.03). The main variables associated with intubation among awake prone patients were increasing age, lower baseline peripheral arterial oxygen saturation/inspiratory oxygen fraction ratio (P aO2 /F IO2 ) and management with a nonrebreather mask.

CONCLUSIONS

Awake prone positioning in hospitalised nonintubated patients with COVID-19 is associated with a lower risk of intubation and mortality.

First and second waves among hospitalised patients with COVID-19 with severe pneumonia: a comparison of 28-day mortality over the 1-year pandemic in a tertiary university hospital in Italy

OBJECTIVE

The first COVID-19-19 epidemic wave was over the period of February-May 2020. Since 1 October 2020, Italy, as many other European countries, faced a second wave. The aim of this analysis was to compare the 28-day mortality between the two waves among COVID-19 hospitalised patients.

DESIGN

Observational cohort study. Standard survival analysis was performed to compare all-cause mortality within 28 days after hospital admission in the two waves. Kaplan-Meier curves as well as Cox regression model analysis were used. The effect of wave on risk of death was shown by means of HRs with 95% CIs. A sensitivity analysis around the impact of the circulating variant as a potential unmeasured confounder was performed.

SETTING

University Hospital of Modena, Italy. Patients admitted to the hospital for severe COVID-19 pneumonia during the first (22 February-31 May 2020) and second (1 October-31 December 2020) waves were included.

RESULTS

During the two study periods, a total of 1472 patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia were admitted to our hospital, 449 during the first wave and 1023 during the second. Median age was 70 years (IQR 56-80), 37% women, 49% with PaO2/FiO2 <250 mm Hg, 82% with ≥1 comorbidity, median duration of symptoms was 6 days. 28-day mortality rate was 20.0% (95% CI 16.3 to 23.7) during the first wave vs 14.2% (95% CI 12.0 to 16.3) in the second (log-rank test p value=0.03). After including key predictors of death in the multivariable Cox regression model, the data still strongly suggested a lower 28-day mortality rate in the second wave (aHR=0.64, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.90, p value=0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In our hospitalised patients with COVID-19 with severe pneumonia, the 28-day mortality appeared to be reduced by 36% during the second as compared with the first wave. Further studies are needed to identify factors that may have contributed to this improved survival.

Awake prone position reduces work of breathing in patients with COVID-19 ARDS supported by CPAP

Background

The use of awake prone position concomitant to non-invasive mechanical ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) secondary to COVID-19 has shown to improve gas exchange, whereas its effect on the work of breathing remain unclear. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of awake prone position during helmet continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) ventilation on inspiratory effort, gas exchange and comfort of breathing.

Methods

Forty consecutive patients presenting with ARDS due to COVID-19 were prospectively enrolled. Gas exchange, esophageal pressure swing (ΔPes), dynamic transpulmonary pressure (dTPP), modified pressure time product (mPTP), work of breathing (WOB) and comfort of breathing, were recorded on supine position and after 3 h on prone position.

Results

The median applied PEEP with helmet CPAP was 10 [8–10] cmH₂O. The PaO₂/FiO₂ was higher in prone compared to supine position (Supine: 166 [136–224] mmHg, Prone: 314 [232–398] mmHg, p < 0.001). Respiratory rate and minute ventilation decreased from supine to prone position from 20 [17–24] to 17 [15–19] b/min (p < 0.001) and from 8.6 [7.3–10.6] to 7.7 [6.6–8.6] L/min (p < 0.001), respectively. Prone position did not reduce ΔPes (Supine: − 7 [− 9 to − 5] cmH₂O, Prone: − 6 [− 9 to − 5] cmH₂O, p = 0.31) and dTPP (Supine: 17 [14–19] cmH₂O, Prone: 16 [14–18] cmH₂O, p = 0.34). Conversely, mPTP and WOB decreased from 152 [104–197] to 118 [90–150] cmH₂O/min (p < 0.001) and from 146 [120–185] to 114 [95–151] cmH₂O L/min (p < 0.001), respectively. Twenty-six (65%) patients experienced a reduction in WOB of more than 10%. The overall sensation of dyspnea was lower in prone position (p = 0.005).

Conclusions

Awake prone position with helmet CPAP enables a reduction in the work of breathing and an improvement in oxygenation in COVID-19-associated ARDS.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13613-021-00967-6.

Research on SARS-COV-2 pandemic: a narrative review focused on the Italian contribution

Background

Since late 2019, a severe acute respiratory syndrome, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), has spread with overwhelming speed causing over 214 million confirmed infections and more than 4.5 million deaths worldwide. In this framework, Italy had the second highest number of SARS-CoV-2 infections worldwide, and the largest number of deaths. A global effort of both the scientific community and governments has been undertaken to stem the pandemic. The aim of this paper is to perform a narrative review of the Italian contribution to the scientific literature regarding intensive care management of patients suffering from COVID-19, being one of the first western countries to face an outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Main body

We performed a narrative review of the literature, dedicating particular attention and a dedicated paragraph to ventilatory support management, chest imaging findings, biomarkers, possible pharmacological interventions, bacterial superinfections, prognosis and non-clinical key aspects such as communication and interaction with relatives.

Conclusions

Many colleagues, nurses and patients died leaving their families alone. To all of them, we send our thoughts and dedicate these pages.

Awake Prone Positioning in the Management of COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Systematic Review

Background: The aim was to investigate the efficacy of prone positioning (PP) in the management of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia in various setups, with various modes of oxygen therapy and its optimal duration. Materials and methods: A systematic literature search was conducted from inception until May 15, 2021. Patients with a validated diagnosis of COVID-19 and receiving PP were included. Various factors, including intensive care unit (ICU) or non-ICU setup, mode of oxygen therapy, outcome, duration of proning, and limitations, were noted. Results: We retrieved 36 articles with a total of 1,385 patients for qualitative analysis. Out of 36 articles, there were 17 original articles, 09 case series, and 10 case reports. Out of 1,385 participants, 78.9% (n = 1,093) and 21.0% (n = 292) of patients were managed in ICU and non-ICU setup, respectively. Awake PP with high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) was found to be a promising technique; however, the result was inconclusive with helmet continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). No study has evaluated the optimal duration of awake PP and the associated long-term outcomes. Conclusion: We encourage the use of early awake self-proning in the management of COVID19 disease. However, the evidence in terms of its use in non-ICU setup, the optimal duration of PP, and various oxygenation devices are insufficient, thereby mandating further well-designed multicentric studies to evaluate its efficacy as an adjunct in the management of COVID-19 pneumonia in context to the aforementioned factor. How to cite this article: Chilkoti GT, Mohta M, Saxena AK, Ahmad Z, Sharma CS. Awake Prone Positioning in the Management of COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Systematic Review. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(8):896-905.

The Role of Noninvasive Respiratory Management in Patients with Severe COVID-19 Pneumonia

Acute hypoxemic respiratory failure is the principal cause of hospitalization, invasive mechanical ventilation and death in severe COVID-19 infection. Nearly half of intubated patients with COVID-19 eventually die. High-Flow Nasal Oxygen (HFNO) and Noninvasive Ventilation (NIV) constitute valuable tools to avert endotracheal intubation in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia who do not respond to conventional oxygen treatment. Sparing Intensive Care Unit beds and reducing intubation-related complications may save lives in the pandemic era. The main drawback of HFNO and/or NIV is intubation delay. Cautious selection of patients with severe hypoxemia due to COVID-19 disease, close monitoring and appropriate employment and titration of HFNO and/or NIV can increase the rate of success and eliminate the risk of intubation delay. At the same time, all precautions to protect the healthcare personnel from viral transmission should be taken. In this review, we summarize the evidence supporting the application of HFNO and NIV in severe COVID-19 hypoxemic respiratory failure, analyse the risks associated with their use and provide a path for their proper implementation.