Use of CPAP Failure Score to Predict the Risk of Helmet-CPAP Support Failure in COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective Study

Non-invasive respiratory support in elderly hospitalized patients

INTRODUCTION

The proportion of elderly people among hospitalized patients is rapidly growing. Between 7% to 25% of ICU patients are aged 85 and over and noninvasive respiratory support is often offered to avoid the risks of invasive mechanical ventilation or in patients with a 'do-not-intubate' order. However, while noninvasive respiratory support has been extensively studied in the general population, there is limited data available on its efficacy in elderly patients with ARF.

AREAS COVERED

PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, Scopus and Embase online databases were searched for studies that assessed clinical efficacy of high flow nasal cannula, continuous positive airway pressure and noninvasive ventilation in patients ≥ 65 years old with acute de novo ARF, showing that short to mid-term benefits provided by noninvasive respiratory support in elderly patients in terms of reduction of mechanical ventilation risk and mortality are similar to younger patients, if adjusted for the severity of comorbidities and respiratory failure.

EXPERT OPINION

Noninvasive support strategies can represent an effective opportunity in elderly patients with ARF, especially in patients too frail to undergo endotracheal intubation and in whom received or decided for a 'do not intubate' order. Indeed, noninvasive support has a different impact, depending on the setting.

Prognostic models in COVID-19 infection that predict severity: a systematic review

Current evidence on COVID-19 prognostic models is inconsistent and clinical applicability remains controversial. We performed a systematic review to summarize and critically appraise the available studies that have developed, assessed and/or validated prognostic models of COVID-19 predicting health outcomes. We searched six bibliographic databases to identify published articles that investigated univariable and multivariable prognostic models predicting adverse outcomes in adult COVID-19 patients, including intensive care unit (ICU) admission, intubation, high-flow nasal therapy (HFNT), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and mortality. We identified and assessed 314 eligible articles from more than 40 countries, with 152 of these studies presenting mortality, 66 progression to severe or critical illness, 35 mortality and ICU admission combined, 17 ICU admission only, while the remaining 44 studies reported prediction models for mechanical ventilation (MV) or a combination of multiple outcomes. The sample size of included studies varied from 11 to 7,704,171 participants, with a mean age ranging from 18 to 93 years. There were 353 prognostic models investigated, with area under the curve (AUC) ranging from 0.44 to 0.99. A great proportion of studies (61.5%, 193 out of 314) performed internal or external validation or replication. In 312 (99.4%) studies, prognostic models were reported to be at high risk of bias due to uncertainties and challenges surrounding methodological rigor, sampling, handling of missing data, failure to deal with overfitting and heterogeneous definitions of COVID-19 and severity outcomes. While several clinical prognostic models for COVID-19 have been described in the literature, they are limited in generalizability and/or applicability due to deficiencies in addressing fundamental statistical and methodological concerns. Future large, multi-centric and well-designed prognostic prospective studies are needed to clarify remaining uncertainties.

The use of continuous positive airway pressure during the second and third waves of the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

In a preliminary study during the first COVID-19 pandemic wave, we reported a high rate of success with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in preventing death and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). That study, however, was too small to identify risk factors for mortality, barotrauma and impact on subsequent IMV. Thus, we re-evaluated the efficacy of the same CPAP protocol in a larger series of patients during second and third pandemic waves.

Methods

281 COVID-19 patients with moderate-to-severe acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure (158 full-code and 123 do-not-intubate (DNI)), were managed with high-flow CPAP early in their hospitalisation. IMV was considered after 4 days of unsuccessful CPAP.

Results

The overall recovery rate from respiratory failure was 50% in the DNI and 89% in the full-code group. Among the latter, 71% recovered with CPAP-only, 3% died under CPAP and 26% were intubated after a median CPAP time of 7 days (IQR: 5-12 days). Of the patients who were intubated, 68% recovered and were discharged from the hospital within 28 days. Barotrauma occurred during CPAP in <4% of patients. Age (OR 1.128; p <0.001) and tomographic severity score (OR 1.139; p=0.006) were the only independent predictors of mortality.

Conclusions

Early treatment with CPAP is a safe option for patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19.

Acute Improvements of Oxygenation with Cpap and Clinical Outcomes in Severe COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Multicenter, Retrospective Study

It is not known if the degrees of improvement in oxygenation obtained by CPAP can predict clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. This was a retrospective study conducted on patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia treated with CPAP in three University hospitals in Milan, Italy, from March 2020 to March 2021. Arterial gas analysis was obtained before and 1 h after starting CPAP. CPAP failure included either death in the respiratory units while on CPAP or the need for intubation. Two hundred and eleven patients (mean age 64 years, 74% males) were included. Baseline median PaO2, PaO2/FiO2 ratio (P/F), and the alveolar-arterial (A-a) O2 gradient were 68 (57−83) mmHg, 129 (91−179) mmHg and 310 (177−559) mmHg, respectively. Forty-two (19.9%) patients died in the respiratory units and 51 (24.2%) were intubated. After starting CPAP, PaO2/FiO2 increased by 57 (12−113; p < 0.001) mmHg, and (A-a) O2 was reduced by 68 (−25−250; p < 0.001) mmHg. A substantial overlap of PaO2, P/F, and A-a gradient at baseline and during CPAP was observed in CPAP failures and successes; CPAP-associated improvements in oxygenation in both groups were similar. In conclusion, CPAP-associated improvements in oxygenation do not predict clinical outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia.