Prone Position Reduces Spontaneous Inspiratory Effort in Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Bicenter Study

Awake prone positioning in acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure

Awake prone positioning (APP) of patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure gained considerable attention during the early phases of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Prior to the pandemic, reports of APP were limited to case series in patients with influenza and in immunocompromised patients, with encouraging results in terms of tolerance and oxygenation improvement. Prone positioning of awake patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure appears to result in many of the same physiological changes improving oxygenation seen in invasively ventilated patients with moderate-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. A number of randomised controlled studies published on patients with varying severity of COVID-19 have reported apparently contrasting outcomes. However, there is consistent evidence that more hypoxaemic patients requiring advanced respiratory support, who are managed in higher care environments and who can be prone for several hours, benefit most from APP use. We review the physiological basis by which prone positioning results in changes in lung mechanics and gas exchange and summarise the latest evidence base for APP primarily in COVID-19. We examine the key factors that influence the success of APP, the optimal target populations for APP and the key unknowns that will shape future research.

Awake prone position in COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

We aimed to investigate the effects of awake prone positioning (APP) in nonintubated adult patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register databases were searched up to June 1, 2022. All randomized trials investigating the effects of APP were included in the present meta-analysis. The primary outcome was intubation rate, and the secondary outcomes included the length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, hospital stay, and mortality. Prescribed subgroup analysis was also conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 10 randomized trials enrolling 2324 patients were ultimately included in the present study. The results indicated that APP was associated with a significant reduction in the intubation rate (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.93, P = 0.007). However, no differences could be observed in the length of ICU stay or hospitalization or mortality. Subgroup analysis suggested that patients in the ICU settings (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.91, P = 0.004), patients whose median APP time was more than 4 h (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.93, P = 0.008), and patients with an average baseline SpO₂ to FiO₂ ratio less than 200 (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.92) were more likely to benefit from APP, indicated a significantly reduced intubation rate.

CONCLUSION

Based on the current evidence, nonintubated adult patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 infection who underwent APP were shown to have a significantly reduced intubation rate. However, no differences in ICU or hospital length of stay or mortality could be observed between APP and usual care.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022337846.

Positive end-expiratory pressure and prone position alter the capacity of force generation from diaphragm in acute respiratory distress syndrome: an animal experiment

BACKGROUND

Spontaneous breathing potentially injures lungs and diaphragm when spontaneous effort is vigorous in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) while immobility also has risks of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) acquired weakness and diaphragm atrophy. Thus, ventilatory strategy to mitigate strong spontaneous effort should be promptly established without a systemic use of neuromuscular blocking agent. Here, we investigated the impacts of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and body position on the capacity of force generation from diaphragm following bilateral phrenic nerve stimulations in a rabbit ARDS model.

METHODS

Using lung-injured rabbits, we measured 1) transdiaphragmatic pressure by bilateral phrenic nerve stimulation and 2) end-expiratory lung volume using computed tomography, under two different levels of PEEP (high, low) and body positions (supine, prone).

RESULTS

Overall, transdiaphragmatic pressure was the highest at low PEEP in supine position and the lowest at high PEEP in prone position. Compared to values in low PEEP + supine, transdiaphragmatic pressure was significantly reduced by either prone alone (the same PEEP) or increasing PEEP alone (the same position) or both combinations. End-expiratory lung volume was significantly increased with increasing PEEP in both positions, but it was not altered by body position.

INTERPRETATION

The capacity of force generation from diaphragm was modulated by PEEP and body position during mechanical ventilation in ARDS. Higher PEEP or prone position per se or both was effective to decrease the force generation from diaphragm.

Lung ultrasound response to awake prone positioning predicts the need for intubation in patients with COVID-19 induced acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: an observational study

Background

Awake prone positioning (APP) reduces the intubation rate in COVID-19 patients treated by high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC). However, the lung aeration response to APP has not been addressed. We aimed to explore the lung aeration response to APP by lung ultrasound (LUS).

Methods

This two-center, prospective, observational study enrolled patients with COVID-19-induced acute hypoxemic respiratory failure treated by HFNC and APP. LUS score was recorded 5–10 min before, 1 h after APP, and 5–10 min after supine in the first APP session within the first three days. The primary outcome was LUS score changes in the first three days. Secondary outcomes included changes in SpO₂/FiO₂ ratio, respiratory rate and ROX index (SpO₂/FiO₂/respiratory rate) related to APP, and the rate of treatment success (patients who avoided intubation).

Results

Seventy-one patients were enrolled. LUS score decreased from 20 (interquartile range [IQR] 19–24) to 19 (18–21) (p < 0.001) after the first APP session, and to 19 (18–21) (p < 0.001) after three days. Compared to patients with treatment failure (n = 20, 28%), LUS score reduction after the first three days in patients with treatment success (n = 51) was greater (− 2.6 [95% confidence intervals − 3.1 to − 2.0] vs 0 [− 1.2 to 1.2], p = 0.001). A decrease in dorsal LUS score > 1 after the first APP session was associated with decreased risk for intubation (Relative risk 0.25 [0.09–0.69]). APP daily duration was correlated with LUS score reduction in patients with treatment success, especially in dorsal lung zones (r =  − 0.76; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

In patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 and treated by HFNC, APP reduced LUS score. The reduction in dorsal LUS scores after APP was associated with treatment success. The longer duration on APP was correlated with greater lung aeration.

Trial registration This study was prospectively registered on clinicaltrials.gov on April 22, 2021. Identification number NCT04855162.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-022-04064-3.

Prone Positioning Decreases Inhomogeneity and Improves Dorsal Compliance in Invasively Ventilated Spontaneously Breathing COVID-19 Patients—A Study Using Electrical Impedance Tomography

Background: We studied prone positioning effects on lung aeration in spontaneously breathing invasively ventilated patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: changes in lung aeration were studied prospectively by electrical impedance tomography (EIT) from before to after placing the patient prone, and back to supine. Mixed effect models with a random intercept and only fixed effects were used to evaluate changes in lung aeration. Results: fifteen spontaneously breathing invasively ventilated patients were enrolled, and remained prone for a median of 19 [17 to 21] hours. At 16 h the global inhomogeneity index was lower. At 2 h, there were neither changes in dorsal nor in ventral compliance; after 16 h, only dorsal compliance (βFe +18.9 [95% Confidence interval (CI): 9.1 to 28.8]) and dorsal end-expiratory lung impedance (EELI) were increased (βFe, +252 [95% CI: 13 to 496]); at 2 and 16 h, dorsal silent spaces was unchanged (βFe, –4.6 [95% CI: –12.3 to +3.2]). The observed changes induced by prone positioning disappeared after turning patients back to supine. Conclusions: in this cohort of spontaneously breathing invasively ventilated COVID-19 patients, prone positioning decreased inhomogeneity, increased lung volumes, and improved dorsal compliance.

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

Background

Awake prone positioning has been broadly utilised for non-intubated patients with COVID-19-related acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure, but the results from published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the past year are contradictory. We aimed to systematically synthesise the outcomes associated with awake prone positioning, and evaluate these outcomes in relevant subpopulations.

Methods

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, two independent groups of researchers searched MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, MedRxiv, BioRxiv, and ClinicalTrials.gov for RCTs and observational studies (with a control group) of awake prone positioning in patients with COVID-19-related acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure published in English from Jan 1, 2020, to Nov 8, 2021. We excluded trials that included patients intubated before or at enrolment, paediatric patients (ie, younger than 18 years), or trials that did not include the supine position in the control group. The same two independent groups screened studies, extracted the summary data from published reports, and assessed the risk of bias. We used a random-effects meta-analysis to pool individual studies. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to assess the certainty and quality of the evidence. The primary outcome was the reported cumulative intubation risk across RCTs, and effect estimates were calculated as risk ratios (RR;95% CI). The analysis was primarily conducted on RCTs, and observational studies were used for sensitivity analyses. No serious adverse events associated with awake prone positioning were reported. The study protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021271285.

Findings

A total of 1243 studies were identified, we assessed 138 full-text articles and received the aggregated results of three unpublished RCTs; therefore, after exclusions, 29 studies were included in the study. Ten were RCTs (1985 patients) and 19 were observational studies (2669 patients). In ten RCTs, awake prone positioning compared with the supine position significantly reduced the need for intubation in the overall population (RR 0·84 [95% CI 0·72–0·97]). A reduced need for intubation was shown among patients who received advanced respiratory support (ie, high-flow nasal cannula or non-invasive ventilation) at enrolment (RR 0·83 [0·71–0·97]) and in intensive care unit (ICU) settings (RR 0·83 [0·71–0·97]) but not in patients receiving conventional oxygen therapy (RR 0·87 [0·45–1·69]) or in non-ICU settings (RR 0·88 [0·44–1·76]). No obvious risk of bias and publication bias was found among the included RCTs for the primary outcome.

Interpretation

In patients with COVID-19-related acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure, awake prone positioning reduced the need for intubation, particularly among those requiring advanced respiratory support and those in ICU settings. Awake prone positioning should be used in patients who have acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 and require advanced respiratory support or are treated in the ICU.

Funding

OpenAI, Rice Foundation, National Institute for Health Research, and Oxford Biomedical Research Centre.

Prone Position Minimizes the Exacerbation of Effort-dependent Lung Injury: Exploring the Mechanism in Pigs and Evaluating Injury in Rabbits

BACKGROUND

Vigorous spontaneous effort can potentially worsen lung injury. This study hypothesized that the prone position would diminish a maldistribution of lung stress and inflation after diaphragmatic contraction and reduce spontaneous effort, resulting in less lung injury.

METHODS

A severe acute respiratory distress syndrome model was established by depleting surfactant and injurious mechanical ventilation in 6 male pigs ("mechanism" protocol) and 12 male rabbits ("lung injury" protocol). In the mechanism protocol, regional inspiratory negative pleural pressure swing (intrabronchial balloon manometry) and the corresponding lung inflation (electrical impedance tomography) were measured with a combination of position (supine or prone) and positive end-expiratory pressure (high or low) matching the intensity of spontaneous effort. In the lung injury protocol, the intensities of spontaneous effort (esophageal manometry) and regional lung injury were compared in the supine position versus prone position.

RESULTS

The mechanism protocol (pigs) found that in the prone position, there was no ventral-to-dorsal gradient in negative pleural pressure swing after diaphragmatic contraction, irrespective of the positive end-expiratory pressure level (-10.3 ± 3.3 cm H2O vs. -11.7 ± 2.4 cm H2O at low positive end-expiratory pressure, P = 0.115; -10.4 ± 3.4 cm H2O vs. -10.8 ± 2.3 cm H2O at high positive end-expiratory pressure, P = 0.715), achieving homogeneous inflation. In the supine position, however, spontaneous effort during low positive end-expiratory pressure had the largest ventral-to-dorsal gradient in negative pleural pressure swing (-9.8 ± 2.9 cm H2O vs. -18.1 ± 4.0 cm H2O, P < 0.001), causing dorsal overdistension. Higher positive end-expiratory pressure in the supine position reduced a ventral-to-dorsal gradient in negative pleural pressure swing, but it remained (-9.9 ± 2.8 cm H2O vs. -13.3 ± 2.3 cm H2O, P < 0.001). The lung injury protocol (rabbits) found that in the prone position, spontaneous effort was milder and lung injury was less without regional difference (lung myeloperoxidase activity in ventral vs. dorsal lung, 74.0 ± 30.9 μm · min-1 · mg-1 protein vs. 61.0 ± 23.0 μm · min-1 · mg-1 protein, P = 0.951). In the supine position, stronger spontaneous effort increased dorsal lung injury (lung myeloperoxidase activity in ventral vs. dorsal lung, 67.5 ± 38.1 μm · min-1 · mg-1 protein vs. 167.7 ± 65.5 μm · min-1 · mg-1 protein, P = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Prone position, independent of positive end-expiratory pressure levels, diminishes a maldistribution of lung stress and inflation imposed by spontaneous effort and mitigates spontaneous effort, resulting in less effort-dependent lung injury.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Noninvasive respiratory support for acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Noninvasive respiratory support has been widely applied during the COVID-19 pandemic. We provide a narrative review on the benefits and possible harms of noninvasive respiratory support for COVID-19 respiratory failure.

RECENT FINDINGS

Maintenance of spontaneous breathing by means of noninvasive respiratory support in hypoxemic patients with vigorous spontaneous effort carries the risk of patient self-induced lung injury: the benefit of averting intubation in successful patients should be balanced with the harms of a worse outcome in patients who are intubated after failing a trial of noninvasive support.The risk of noninvasive treatment failure is greater in patients with the most severe oxygenation impairment (PaO2/FiO2 < 200 mmHg).High-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) is the most widely applied intervention in COVID-19 patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure. Also, noninvasive ventilation (NIV) and continuous positive airway pressure delivered with different interfaces have been used with variable success rates. A single randomized trial showed lower need for intubation in patients receiving helmet NIV with specific settings, compared to HFNO alone.Prone positioning is recommended for moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome patients on invasive ventilation. Awake prone position has been frequently applied in COVID-19 patients: one randomized trial showed improved oxygenation and lower intubation rate in patients receiving 6-h sessions of awake prone positioning, as compared to conventional management.

SUMMARY

Noninvasive respiratory support and awake prone position are tools possibly capable of averting endotracheal intubation in COVID-19 patients; carefully monitoring during any treatment is warranted to avoid delays in endotracheal intubation, especially in patients with PaO2/FiO2 < 200 mmHg.

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.

To prone or not to prone ARDS patients on ECMO

This article is one of ten reviews selected from the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine 2021. Other selected articles can be found online at  https://www.biomedcentral.com/collections/annualupdate2021 . Further information about the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine is available from  https://link.springer.com/bookseries/8901 .

Sustained oxygenation improvement after first prone positioning is associated with liberation from mechanical ventilation and mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients: a cohort study

Background

Prone positioning (PP) has been used to improve oxygenation in patients affected by the SARS-CoV-2 disease (COVID-19). Several mechanisms, including lung recruitment and better lung ventilation/perfusion matching, make a relevant rational for using PP. However, not all patients maintain the oxygenation improvement after returning to supine position. Nevertheless, no evidence exists that a sustained oxygenation response after PP is associated to outcome in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients. We analyzed data from 191 patients affected by COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome undergoing PP for clinical reasons. Clinical history, severity scores and respiratory mechanics were analyzed. Patients were classified as responders (≥ median PaO₂/FiO₂ variation) or non-responders (< median PaO₂/FiO₂ variation) based on the PaO₂/FiO₂ percentage change between pre-proning and 1 to 3 h after re-supination in the first prone positioning session. Differences among the groups in physiological variables, complication rates and outcome were evaluated. A competing risk regression analysis was conducted to evaluate if PaO₂/FiO₂ response after the first pronation cycle was associated to liberation from mechanical ventilation.

Results

The median PaO₂/FiO₂ variation after the first PP cycle was 49 [19–100%] and no differences were found in demographics, comorbidities, ventilatory treatment and PaO₂/FiO₂ before PP between responders (96/191) and non-responders (95/191). Despite no differences in ICU length of stay, non-responders had a higher rate of tracheostomy (70.5% vs 47.9, P = 0.008) and mortality (53.7% vs 33.3%, P = 0.006), as compared to responders. Moreover, oxygenation response after the first PP was independently associated to liberation from mechanical ventilation at 28 days and was increasingly higher being higher the oxygenation response to PP.

Conclusions

Sustained oxygenation improvement after first PP session is independently associated to improved survival and reduced duration of mechanical ventilation in critically ill COVID-19 patients.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13613-021-00853-1.