Ten things you need to know about intensive care unit management of mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19

Survival analysis of COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19 patients requiring intensive care for acute respiratory distress syndrome: An observational retrospective study

Background/Aim

This study analyzed clinical factors impacting the survival of COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress síndrome, or ARDS (CARDS) to ICU compared to non-COVID-19 ARDS patients.

Methods

Clinical variables from 1,008 CARDS cases and 332 ARDS cases were computed using learning algorithms. The multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models with the enter method evaluated risk factors and ICU mortality relationships. The survival analysis was completed with Kaplan-Meier and the log-rank tests.

Results

A Random Forest model revealed that mechanical ventilation-related factors, oxygenation, blood pH, superinfection, shock, and ICU length of stay have the greatest effects on ICU survival. According to a multivariate Cox model, reintubation and a high-flow nasal cannula were essential for survival in CARDS patients during the ICU stay. The length of stay in the ICU diminishes in patients older than 45 years, regardless of the source of ARDS.

Conclusion

This study gives recommendations for the respiratory care of ARDS in COVID-19 patients.

In-hospital care of children with COVID-19

Children have been reported to be less affected and to have milder severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection than adults during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. However, children, and particularly those with underlying disorders, are still likely to develop critical illnesses. In the case of SARS-CoV-2 infection, most previous studies have focused on adult patients. To aid in the knowledge of in-hospital care of children with COVID-19, this study presents an expert review of the literature, including the management of respiratory distress or failure, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), hemodynamic and other organ support, pharmaceutical therapies (anti-viral drugs, anti-inflammatory or antithrombotic therapies) and management of cardiopulmonary arrest.

Anti-inflammatory therapies for acute respiratory distress syndrome

INTRODUCTION

Treatments for the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are mainly supportive, and ventilatory management represents a key approach in these patients. Despite progress in pharmacotherapy, anti-inflammatory strategies for the treatment of ARDS have shown controversial results. Positive outcomes with pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments have been found in two different biological subphenotypes of ARDS, suggesting that, with a personalized medicine approach, pharmacotherapy for ARDS can be effective.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews the literature concerning anti-inflammatory therapies for ARDS, focusing on pharmacological and stem-cell therapies, including extracellular vesicles.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite advances, ARDS treatments remain primarily supportive. Ventilatory and fluid management are important strategies in these patients that have demonstrated significant impacts on outcome. Anti-inflammatory drugs have shown some benefits, primarily in preclinical research and in specific clinical scenarios, but no recommendations are available from guidelines to support their use in patients with ARDS, except in particular settings such as different subphenotypes, specific etiologies, or clinical trials. Personalized medicine seems promising insofar as it may identify specific subgroups of patients with ARDS who may benefit from anti-inflammatory treatment. However, additional efforts are needed to move subphenotype characterization from bench to bedside.

New and personalized ventilatory strategies in patients with COVID-19

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus and may lead to severe respiratory failure and the need for mechanical ventilation (MV). At hospital admission, patients can present with severe hypoxemia and dyspnea requiring increasingly aggressive MV strategies according to the clinical severity: noninvasive respiratory support (NRS), MV, and the use of rescue strategies such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Among NRS strategies, new tools have been adopted for critically ill patients, with advantages and disadvantages that need to be further elucidated. Advances in the field of lung imaging have allowed better understanding of the disease, not only the pathophysiology of COVID-19 but also the consequences of ventilatory strategies. In cases of refractory hypoxemia, the use of ECMO has been advocated and knowledge on handling and how to personalize strategies have increased during the pandemic. The aims of the present review are to: (1) discuss the evidence on different devices and strategies under NRS; (2) discuss new and personalized management under MV based on the pathophysiology of COVID-19; and (3) contextualize the use of rescue strategies such as ECMO in critically ill patients with COVID-19.

High flow nasal oxygen and awake prone positioning - Two allies against COVID-19: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Severe 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.

METHODS

We 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.

RESULTS

Thirteen 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.

CONCLUSIONS

Our 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.

Morphological and functional findings in COVID-19 lung disease as compared to Pneumonia, ARDS, and High-Altitude Pulmonary Edema

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) may severely affect respiratory function and evolve to life-threatening hypoxia. The clinical experience led to the implementation of standardized protocols assuming similarity to severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS-CoV-2). Understanding the histopathological and functional patterns is essential to better understand the pathophysiology of COVID-19 and then develop new therapeutic strategies. Epithelial and endothelial cell damage can result from the virus attack, thus leading to immune-mediated response. Pulmonary histopathological findings show the presence of Mallory bodies, alveolar coating cells with nuclear atypia, reactive pneumocytes, reparative fibrosis, intra-alveolar hemorrhage, moderate inflammatory infiltrates, micro-abscesses, microthrombus, hyaline membrane fragments, and emphysema-like lung areas. COVID-19 patients may present different respiratory stages from silent to critical hypoxemia, are associated with the degree of pulmonary parenchymal involvement, thus yielding alteration of ventilation and perfusion relationships. This review aims to: discuss the morphological (histopathological and radiological) and functional findings of COVID-19 compared to acute interstitial pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and high-altitude pulmonary edema (HAPE), four entities that share common clinical traits, but have peculiar pathophysiological features with potential implications to their clinical management.

Understanding the pathophysiology of typical acute respiratory distress syndrome and severe COVID-19

Introduction

Typical acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and severe coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pneumonia share complex pathophysiology, a high mortality rate, and an unmet need for efficient therapeutics.

Areas covered

This review discusses the current advances in understanding the pathophysiologic mechanisms underlying typical ARDS and severe COVID-19 pneumonia, highlighting specific aspects of COVID-19-related acute hypoxemic respiratory failure that require attention. Two models have been proposed to describe the mechanisms of respiratory failure associated with typical ARDS and severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

Expert opinion

ARDS is defined as a syndrome rather than a distinct pathologic entity. There is great heterogeneity regarding the pathophysiologic, clinical, radiologic, and biological phenotypes in patients with ARDS, challenging clinicians, and scientists to discover new therapies. COVID-19 has been described as a cause of pulmonary ARDS and has reopened many questions regarding the pathophysiology of ARDS itself. COVID-19 lung injury involves direct viral epithelial cell damage and thrombotic and inflammatory reactions. There are some differences between ARDS and COVID-19 lung injury in aspects of aeration distribution, perfusion, and pulmonary vascular responses.

Different Methods to Improve the Monitoring of Noninvasive Respiratory Support of Patients with Severe Pneumonia/ARDS Due to COVID-19: An Update

The latest guidelines for the hospital care of patients affected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related acute respiratory failure have moved towards the widely accepted use of noninvasive respiratory support (NIRS) as opposed to early intubation at the pandemic onset. The establishment of severe COVID-19 pneumonia goes through different pathophysiological phases that partially resemble typical acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and have been categorized into different clinical-radiological phenotypes. These can variably benefit on the application of external positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) during noninvasive mechanical ventilation, mainly due to variable levels of lung recruitment ability and lung compliance during different phases of the disease. A growing body of evidence suggests that intense respiratory effort producing excessive negative pleural pressure swings (Ppl) plays a critical role in the onset and progression of lung and diaphragm damage in patients treated with noninvasive respiratory support. Routine respiratory monitoring is mandatory to avoid the nasty continuation of NIRS in patients who are at higher risk for respiratory deterioration and could benefit from early initiation of invasive mechanical ventilation instead. Here we propose different monitoring methods both in the clinical and experimental settings adapted for this purpose, although further research is required to allow their extensive application in clinical practice. We reviewed the needs and available tools for clinical-physiological monitoring that aims at optimizing the ventilatory management of patients affected by acute respiratory distress syndrome due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 Phenotypes, Lung Ultrasound, Chest Computed Tomography and Clinical Features in Critically Ill Mechanically Ventilated Patients

Chest computed tomography (CT) may provide insights into the pathophysiology of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), although it is not suitable for a timely bedside dynamic assessment of patients admitted to intensive care unit (ICU); therefore, lung ultrasound (LUS) has been proposed as a complementary diagnostic tool. The aims of this study were to investigate different lungs phenotypes in patients with COVID-19 and to assess the differences in CT and LUS scores between ICU survivors and non-survivors. We also explored the association between CT and LUS, and oxygenation (arterial partial pressure of oxygen [PaO₂]/fraction of inspired oxygen [FiO_2]) and clinical parameters. The study included 39 patients with COVID-19. CT scans revealed types 1, 2 and 3 phenotypes in 62%, 28% and 10% of patients, respectively. Among survivors, pattern 1 was prevalent (p < 0.005). Chest CT and LUS scores differed between survivors and non-survivors both at ICU admission and 10 days after and were associated with ICU mortality. Chest CT score was positively correlated with LUS findings at ICU admission (r = 0.953, p < 0.0001) and was inversely correlated with PaO₂/FiO₂ (r = -0.375, p = 0.019) and C-reactive protein (r = 0.329, p = 0.041). LUS score was inversely correlated with PaO₂/FiO₂ (r = -0.345, p = 0.031). COVID-19 presents distinct phenotypes with differences between survivors and non-survivors. LUS is a valuable monitoring tool in an ICU setting because it may correlate with CT findings and mortality, although it cannot predict oxygenation changes.

Noninvasive respiratory support and patient self-inflicted lung injury in COVID-19: a narrative review

COVID-19 pneumonia is associated with hypoxaemic respiratory failure, ranging from mild to severe. Because of the worldwide shortage of ICU beds, a relatively high number of patients with respiratory failure are receiving prolonged noninvasive respiratory support, even when their clinical status would have required invasive mechanical ventilation. There are few experimental and clinical data reporting that vigorous breathing effort during spontaneous ventilation can worsen lung injury and cause a phenomenon that has been termed patient self-inflicted lung injury (P-SILI). The aim of this narrative review is to provide an overview of P-SILI pathophysiology and the role of noninvasive respiratory support in COVID-19 pneumonia. Respiratory mechanics, vascular compromise, viscoelastic properties, lung inhomogeneity, work of breathing, and oesophageal pressure swings are discussed. The concept of P-SILI has been widely investigated in recent years, but controversies persist regarding its mechanisms. To minimise the risk of P-SILI, intensivists should better understand its underlying pathophysiology to optimise the type of noninvasive respiratory support provided to patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, and decide on the optimal timing of intubation for these patients.