Impact of Sedation Practices on Mortality in COVID-19-Associated Adult Respiratory Distress Syndrome Patients: A Multicenter Retrospective Descriptive Study.

Background: Reduction in sedation exposure is an important metric in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. However, challenges arose during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in adhering to this practice, driven by concerns on transmission and disease severity issues. Accordingly, diverse sedation approaches emerged, although the effect on mortality has not been studied thoroughly. Methods: Retrospective cohort study in the medical ICU of seven hospitals within a major Health System in Northeast Ohio. We included all adult patients admitted with COVID-19 requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) from March 2020 to December 2021. Results: Study included 2394 COVID-19 patients requiring IMV. Across waves, sample included 55-63% male subjects, with an average age of 61-68 years (P < 0.001), Acute Physiologic and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE)-III score 65.8-68.9 (P = 0.37), median IMV duration 8-10 days (P = 0.14), and median ICU duration 9.8-11.6 days (P = 0.084). Propofol remained the primary sedative (84-92%; P = 0.089). Ketamine use increased from the first (9.7%) to fourth (19%) wave (P = 0.002). Midazolam use decreased from the first (27.4%) to third (9.4%) wave (P = 0.001). Dexmedetomidine use declined from 35% to 27-28% (P = 0.002) after the first wave. A multivariable regression analysis indicated clinical variables explained 34% of the variation in hospital mortality (R2). Factors associated with higher mortality included age [aOR = 1.059 (95% CI 1.049-1.069); P < 0.001], COVID-19 wave, especially fourth wave [aOR = 2.147, (95% CI 1.370-3.365); P = 0.001], and higher number of vasopressors [aOR = 31.636, (95% CI 17.603-56.856); P < 0.001]. Addition of sedative medications to a second model led to an increase in the R2 by only 1.6% to 35.6% [aOR = 1 (95% CI 1-1); P > 0.05] for propofol, ketamine, and midazolam. Dexmedetomidine demonstrated a decrease in the odds of mortality [aOR = 0.96 (95% CI 0.94-0.97); P < 0.001]. Conclusion: Mortality in critical COVID-19 patients was mostly driven by illness severity, and the choice of sedation might have minimal impact when other factors are controlled.

Antipsychotic Use for ICU Delirium and Associated Inflammatory Markers.

Purpose: We sought to evaluate critically ill patients with delirium to evaluate inflammatory cytokine production and delirium progression and the role of antipsychotics. Materials and Methods: Adult critically ill patients with confirmed delirium according to a positive CAM-ICU score were included and IL-6 and IL-8 levels were trended for 24 h in this single-center, prospective, observational cohort study. Results: A total of 23 patients were consented and had blood samples drawn for inclusion. There was no difference in IL-6 and IL-8 levels at baseline, 4 to 8 h, and 22 to 28 h after enrollment when comparing patients based on antipsychotic exposure. We identified 2 patient clusters based on age, APACHE III, need for mechanical ventilation, and concomitant infection. In cluster 1, 5 (33.3%) patients received antipsychotics versus 5 (62.5%) patients in cluster 2 (P = .18). Patients in cluster 1 had more co-inflammatory conditions (P < .0001), yet numerically lower baseline IL-6 (P = .18) and IL-8 levels (P = .80) compared to cluster 2. Patients in cluster 1 had a greater median number of delirium-free days compared to cluster 2 (17.0 vs 6.0 days; P = .05). Conclusions: In critically ill patients with delirium, IL-6 and IL-8 levels were variable and antipsychotics were not associated with improvements in delirium or inflammatory markers.

Antibody-Mediated Rejection Management Following Lung Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Although antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) is described in other solid organ transplant populations, the literature describing the management following lung transplantation is limited. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the management strategies of AMR in lung transplant recipients. METHODS: This single-center, retrospective study described the management of AMR in adult lung transplant recipients who received treatment with rabbit antithymocyte globulin, bortezomib, rituximab, intravenous immune globulin (IVIG), and/or plasmapheresis between September 2015 and June 2019. RESULTS: A total of 270 medication orders for 55 patient admissions were included in the primary outcome analysis. The most commonly used regimen consisted of IVIG, plasmapheresis, and rituximab (49.1%; n = 27), followed by IVIG and plasmapheresis alone (27.3%, n = 15). A total of 51 patients (93%) received plasmapheresis as part of their AMR treatment, with a median of 4 [3, 5] sessions per encounter; 86% of patients with positive donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) had a reduction in DSAs following AMR treatment. Overall, 23.5% of patients had noted allograft failure or need for retransplantation. A total of 10 patients died during the AMR treatment hospital admission, and an additional 11 patients died within 1 year of the initial encounter. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: This represents the largest report describing management strategies of AMR in lung transplant recipients. Although practice varied, the most commonly used regimen consisted of plasmapheresis, IVIG, and rituximab.

Prescribing Practices of Valproic Acid for Agitation and Delirium in the Intensive Care Unit.

BACKGROUND: Analgesics, sedatives, and antipsychotics are commonly prescribed for agitation and delirium in the intensive care unit (ICU), but their use is limited by adverse effects and lack of efficacy. Valproic acid is an alternative treatment option. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to describe valproic acid prescribing in our institution's ICUs when used for agitation or delirium. Measures of effectiveness and safety were also assessed. METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective, institutional review board-approved cohort study of adult inpatients admitted to the ICU between January 2018 and August 2018. Patients who received valproic acid for the treatment of agitation or delirium for ≥24 hours were included. Prescribing practices were evaluated for dose, frequency, and route of administration. Effectiveness was assessed via agitation and delirium assessment tools and quantity of adjunctive agents used. RESULTS: A total of 80 patients were included, with 35 receiving valproic acid alone and 45 in conjunction with antipsychotics. The most common valproic acid regimen was 250 mg orally 3 times daily. Delirium resolution occurred in 55% of patients: 24 in the valproic acid monotherapy group and 20 in the valproic acid plus antipsychotic group (69% vs 44%; P = 0.03). The incidence of delirium decreased from valproic acid day 0 to day 3 (93% vs 68%; P < 0.01), with no change in agitation (64% vs 63%; P = 0.28). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Valproic acid is frequently prescribed in agitated, delirious patients at our institution and may have a role in the management of ICU delirium.

Effectiveness, Safety, and Economic Comparison of Inhaled Epoprostenol Brands, Flolan and Veletri, in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

Background: No previous studies exist examining 2 inhaled epoprostenol formulations in an acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patient population. Objective: The study aim was to evaluate a formulary conversion from inhaled Flolan to Veletri to determine the impact on effectiveness, safety, and cost in patients with ARDS. Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective, matched cohort observational study at a tertiary care academic medical center. Patients included were mechanically ventilated, adult patients with ARDS receiving inhaled Flolan or Veletri for ≥1 hour in the intensive care unit. Results: A total of 132 patients were included in the matched cohort. There was no difference detected in change in partial pressure of arterial O2/fraction of inspired O2 (PaO2/FiO2) ratio after 1 hour of therapy between the inhaled Flolan and Veletri groups (27.2 ± 46.2 vs 30 ± 68 mm Hg, P = 0.78). Significant differences in secondary outcomes included incidence of hypotension (83% vs 95.5%, P = 0.04) and thrombocytopenia (9.1% vs 29.5%, P < 0.01) in the inhaled Flolan and Veletri groups, respectively, with no difference in cost per duration of therapy (P = 0.29). Conclusions and Relevance: There was no difference in the change in PaO2/FiO2 ratio after 1 hour of therapy between inhaled Flolan and Veletri in an ARDS patient population. The formulary conversion from inhaled Flolan to Veletri was likely justified.

Evaluation of Albumin 25% Use in Critically Ill Patients at a Tertiary Care Medical Center.

Background: Albumin 25% has been studied and has demonstrated benefit in a limited number of patient populations. The use of albumin 25% is associated with higher costs compared with crystalloid therapy. The aim of this study was to describe the prescribing practices of albumin 25% at a tertiary-care medical center and identify opportunities for restriction criteria related to its use to help generate cost savings. Methods: This evaluation was a retrospective, noninterventional, descriptive study of albumin 25% use between June 2015 and February 2016. Inclusion criteria consisted of patients ≥18 years old and who received at least one dose of albumin 25% while admitted to a Cleveland Clinic main campus intensive care unit (ICU). Inclusion was restricted to 150 randomly selected patients. Results: A total of 539 albumin 25% orders were placed for the 150 included patients. The cardiovascular ICU more frequently prescribed albumin 25% compared with the medical, surgical, neurosciences, and coronary ICUs (51% vs 23% vs 11% vs 9% vs 6%, respectively). Although the cardiovascular surgery ICU most frequently prescribed albumin 25% compared with other ICUs, the medical ICU prescribed a larger total quantity of albumin 25% compared with the cardiovascular, surgical, neurosciences, and coronary ICUs (8705 g vs 7275 g vs 3205 g vs 2162 g vs 625 g, respectively). The majority of patients (61%) did not have an indication listed for albumin 25% use and only 9% of patients were prescribed for indications supported by primary literature. Of the patients prescribed albumin for other indications not supported by primary literature (30%), the most common reasons for albumin 25% were hypotension, acute kidney injury, and volume resuscitation. The median cost per patient of albumin 25% was $417 with a total cost of $122 164 for the cohort. Only 19% of the total cost aligned with dosing regimens evaluated in primary literature. Conclusion: Prescribing patterns of albumin 25% at a tertiary academic medical center do not align with indications supported by primary literature. These findings identified a major opportunity for prescriber education and implementation of restriction criteria to target cost savings.

Sedation Variability Increases Incidence of Delirium in Adult Medical Intensive Care Unit Patients at a Tertiary Academic Medical Center.

BACKGROUND: Variability in sedation may increase the incidence of delirium and mortality, as well as increased intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital lengths of stay (LOS), despite mean Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) scores at goal. Coefficient of variation (CV) can be used to represent variability with a higher ratio indicating increased variability. STUDY QUESTION: Do patients with an increased variability in sedation, as evaluated by CV in RASS, have an increased incidence of delirium? METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of adult medical ICU patients requiring mechanical ventilation (MV) for ≥24 hours between January and April 2013. Patients were excluded if intubated at an outside hospital, neuromuscularly blocked, suffering from anoxic brain injury, or had a goal RASS of -4 or -5. Outcomes assessed included the presence of delirium, as evaluated by the Confusion Assessment Method, RASS, CV in RASS, duration of MV, ICU, and hospital LOS, and survival. RESULTS: Of 45 included patients, 32 experienced delirium during their ICU admission and 13 did not. The groups were similar at baseline. There was no difference in mean RASS when comparing the delirium and nondelirium groups (-1.6 ± 1.3 vs. -1.8 ± 0.8, respectively; P = 0.61). Patients with delirium had a greater CV in RASS (0.3 ± 0.135 vs. 0.2 ± 0.105; P = 0.02), a longer MV duration [4 (2-8) vs. 3 (2-3) days; P = 0.045], and a trend toward increased ICU LOS [8 (5-12.25) vs. 4 (3-8) days; P = 0.096], but no difference in hospital LOS [13 (10-25) vs. 18 (9-39) days; P = 0.83] and survival (71.9% vs. 69.2%; P = 1.0). CONCLUSION: Medical ICU patients with delirium had a higher CV in RASS compared with patients without delirium, suggesting that greater variability in sedation may increase the incidence of delirium. Patients with delirium also had a greater duration of MV and a trend toward longer ICU LOS.

Correction to: Clinical predictors of renal non-recovery in acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Following publication of the original article.

Clinical predictors of renal non-recovery in acute respiratory distress syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is the most common extra-pulmonary organ failure in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Renal recovery after AKI is determined by several factors. The objective of this study was to determine the predictors of renal non-recovery in ARDS patients. METHODS: A single center retrospective cohort study of patients with AKI after onset of ARDS. Patients with preexisting chronic kidney disease or intensive care unit stay < 24 h were excluded. AKI staging was defined according to the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) 2012 guidelines. Renal non-recovery was defined as death, dialysis dependence, serum creatinine ≥1.5 times the baseline, or urine output < 0.5 mL/kg/h more than 6 h. RESULTS: Of the 244 patients that met study criteria, 60 (24.6%) had stage I AKI, 66 (27%) had stage II AKI, and 118 (48.4%) had stage III AKI. Of those, 148 (60.7%) patients had renal non-recovery. On multivariable analysis, factors associated with renal non-recovery were a higher stage of AKI (odds ratio [OR] stage II 5.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.17-14.98; OR stage III 45.85, 95% CI 16.27-129.2), delay in the onset of AKI (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.03-1.21), history of malignancy (OR 4.02, 95% CI 1.59-10.15), septic shock (OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.52-6.76), and a higher tidal volume on day 1-3 of ARDS (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.05-1.90). Subgroup analysis of survival at day 28 of ARDS also found that higher severity of AKI (OR stage II 8.17, 95% CI 0.84-79.91; OR stage III 111.67, 95% CI 12.69-982.91), delayed onset of AKI (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.02-1.23), and active malignancy (OR 6.55, 95% CI 1.34-32.04) were significant predictors of renal non-recovery. CONCLUSIONS: A higher stage of AKI, delayed onset of AKI, a history of malignancy, septic shock, and a higher tidal volume on day 1-3 of ARDS predicted renal non-recovery in ARDS patients. Among survivors, a higher stage of AKI, delayed onset of AKI, and a history of malignancy were associated with renal non-recovery.

Effectiveness, safety, and Economic Comparison of Two Inhaled Epoprostentol Products (Flolan and Veletri) in Cardiothoracic Surgery Patients.

BACKGROUND: No previous studies exist examining two inhaled epoprosternol formulations (Flolan compared with Veletri) in a homogenous cardiothoracic surgery patient population. OBJECTIVE: To compare the impact of inhaled Flolan and inhaled Veletri on the effectiveness, safety, or cost in cardiothoracic surgery patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective, noninferiority study comparing inhaled Flolan and inhaled Veletri in cardiothoracic surgery patients. Participants included were ≥18 years old, admitted to the cardiothoracic intensive care unit, and received inhaled Flolan or inhaled Veletri therapy for ≥1 hour. RESULTS: A total of 244 patients were included in the primary outcome analysis (122 patients per group). The primary outcome, change in the partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) ratio 1 hour after administration of inhaled Flolan or inhaled Veletri, did not cross the lower limit of the noninferiority margin (95% CI = -14.8 to 65.4). Significant differences in secondary outcomes included duration of mechanical ventilation (4.4 vs 2.6 days; P < 0.01), number of tracheostomies (24 vs 9; P = 0.01), number of patients initiated on dialysis (25 vs 12; P = 0.02), and cost per median duration of therapy ($257 vs $183; P = 0.02) in the inhaled Flolan and inhaled Veletri groups, with the average duration of therapy being 1.6 and 1.3 days, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Inhaled Veletri was demonstrated to be non-inferior to inhaled Flolan when comparing change in PaO2/FiO2 ratio 1 hour post -therapy initiation,and inhaled Veletri was an acceptable alternative to inhaled Flolan in a cardiothoracic surgery patient population.

Clinical and Economic Impact of Formulary Conversion From Inhaled Flolan to Inhaled Veletri for Refractory Hypoxemia in Critically Ill Patients.

BACKGROUND: Flolan (iFLO) and Veletri (iVEL) are 2 inhaled epoprostenol formulations. There is no published literature comparing these formulations in critically ill patients with refractory hypoxemia. OBJECTIVE: To compare efficacy, safety, and cost outcomes in patients who received either iFLO or iVEL for hypoxic respiratory failure. METHODS: This was a retrospective, single-center analysis of adult, mechanically ventilated patients receiving iFLO or iVEL for improvement in oxygenation. The primary end point was the change in the PaO2/FiO2 ratio after 1 hour of pulmonary vasodilator therapy. Secondary end points assessed were intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, duration of study therapy, duration of mechanical ventilation, mortality, incidence of adverse events, and cost. RESULTS: A total of 104 patients were included (iFLO = 52; iVEL = 52). More iFLO patients had acute respiratory distress syndrome compared with the iVEL group (61.5 vs 34.6%; P = 0.01). There was no difference in the change in the PaO2/FiO2 ratio after 1 hour of therapy (33.04 ± 36.9 vs 31.47 ± 19.92; P = 0.54) in the iFLO and iVEL groups, respectively. Patients who received iVEL had a shorter duration of mechanical ventilation (P < 0.001) and ICU LOS (P < 0.001) but not hospital LOS (P = 0.86) and duration of therapy (P = 0.36). No adverse events were attributed to pulmonary vasodilator therapy, and there was no difference in cost. CONCLUSIONS: We found no difference between iFLO and iVEL when comparing the change in the PaO2/FiO2 ratio, safety, and cost in hypoxic, critically ill patients. There were differences in secondary outcomes, likely a result of differences in underlying indication for inhaled epoprostenol.

Sotatercept for Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension in the Inpatient Setting.

Patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) who are admitted to the hospital pose a challenge to the multidisciplinary healthcare team due to the complexity of the pathophysiology of their disease state and PAH-specific medication considerations. Pulmonary arterial hypertension is a progressive disease that may lead to death as a result of right ventricular (RV) failure. During acute on chronic RV failure it is critical to decrease the pulmonary vascular resistance with the goal of improving RV function and prognosis; therefore, aggressive PAH-treatment based on disease risk stratification is essential. Pulmonary arterial hypertension treatment for acute on chronic RV failure can be impacted by end-organ damage, hemodynamic instability, drug interactions, and PAH medications dosage and delivery. Sotatercept, a first in class activin signaling inhibitor that works on the bone morphogenetic protein/activin pathway is on track for Food and Drug Administration approval for the treatment of PAH based on results of recent trials in where the medication led to clinical and hemodynamic improvements, even when added to traditional PAH-specific therapies. The purpose of this review is to highlight important considerations when starting or continuing sotatercept in patients admitted to the hospital with PAH.

Forecasting disease trajectories in critical illness: comparison of probabilistic dynamic systems to static models to predict patient status in the intensive care unit.

OBJECTIVE: Conventional prediction models fail to integrate the constantly evolving nature of critical illness. Alternative modelling approaches to study dynamic changes in critical illness progression are needed. We compare static risk prediction models to dynamic probabilistic models in early critical illness. DESIGN: We developed models to simulate disease trajectories of critically ill COVID-19 patients across different disease states. Eighty per cent of cases were randomly assigned to a training and 20% of the cases were used as a validation cohort. Conventional risk prediction models were developed to analyse different disease states for critically ill patients for the first 7 days of intensive care unit (ICU) stay. Daily disease state transitions were modelled using a series of multivariable, multinomial logistic regression models. A probabilistic dynamic systems modelling approach was used to predict disease trajectory over the first 7 days of an ICU admission. Forecast accuracy was assessed and simulated patient clinical trajectories were developed through our algorithm. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We retrospectively studied patients admitted to a Cleveland Clinic Healthcare System in Ohio, for the treatment of COVID-19 from March 2020 to December 2022. RESULTS: 5241 patients were included in the analysis. For ICU days 2-7, the static (conventional) modelling approach, the accuracy of the models steadily decreased as a function of time, with area under the curve (AUC) for each health state below 0.8. But the dynamic forecasting approach improved its ability to predict as a function of time. AUC for the dynamic forecasting approach were all above 0.90 for ICU days 4-7 for all states. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that modelling critical care outcomes as a dynamic system improved the forecasting accuracy of the disease state. Our model accurately identified different disease conditions and trajectories, with a <10% misclassification rate over the first week of critical illness.

Impact of a protocol advocating dexmedetomidine over propofol sedation after robotic-assisted direct coronary artery bypass surgery on duration of mechanical ventilation and patient safety.

BACKGROUND: Controversy remains whether propofol or dexmedetomidine is the preferred sedative following cardiac surgery. Dexmedetomidine may offer advantages over propofol among patients undergoing robotic-assisted, minimally invasive, direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) surgery given the rapidity with which this population is usually extubated after surgery. OBJECTIVE: To measure the impact of a surgery protocol advocating use of dexmedetomidine rather than propofol after MIDCAB surgery on discontinuation of mechanical ventilation and patient safety. METHODS: The records on consecutive adults undergoing MIDCAB surgery who received postoperative sedation with propofol or dexmedetomidine at a 508-bed academic medical center were analyzed before and after implementation of a post-MIDCAB surgery protocol advocating dexmedetomidine use. RESULTS: Seventy-three propofol patients were compared with 53 dexmedetomidine patients. The groups were similar, except propofol patients were older (p = 0.002) and more likely to have underlying heart failure that was either moderate or severe (New York Heart Association class III or IV) (p = 0.0001). Time (median [interquartile range]) to extubation (hours) was shorter in the dexmedetomidine group (5.0 [3.6-7.0] vs 9.8 [5.0-16.3]; p = 0.0001). A Cox proportional hazards model revealed that patient age (p = 0.001) and duration of surgery (p = 0.003) influenced time to extubation between the dexmedetomidine and propofol groups but the presence of moderate or severe heart failure (p = 0.438), the number of coronary vessels operated on (p = 0.130), use of an opioid (p = 0.791), or the total dose of morphine administered (p = 0.215) did not. During sedation administration, more propofol-treated patients experienced 1 or more episodes of hypotension (systolic blood pressure ≤80 mm Hg, 11.6% vs 0%; p = 0.02), tachycardia (heart rate ≥120 beats/min, 8.6% vs 0%; p = 0.04), and unarousability (Sedation Agitation Scale score ≤2, 30.0% vs 9.4%; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Use of a protocol promoting dexmedetomidine, rather than propofol sedation, after MIDCAB surgery facilitates faster discontinuation of mechanical ventilation and is associated with greater hemodynamic stability and arousability.

Implementation of a dexmedetomidine stewardship program at a tertiary academic medical center.

BACKGROUND: Brigham and Women's Hospital implemented a dexmedetomidine stewardship program in October 2010 beginning with an institution-specific prescribing guideline. To ensure continued adherence to the prescribing guideline, a pharmacist-driven quality assurance program was implemented in November 2011. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study is to describe the role and impact of a dexmedetomidine stewardship program on dexmedetomidine use at a tertiary academic medical center. METHODS: This is a prospective descriptive analysis of a dexmedetomidine stewardship program. Dexmedetomidine stewardship data were collected prospectively from January 2012 through June 2012, in all intensive care units (ICUs) at a single academic medical center. Adult patients (>18 years old) receiving dexmedetomidine therapy continuously for sedation and in the ICU were included in the analysis. RESULTS: A total of 99 patients were identified during the study time frame, during which 71 (71.7%) were identified as compliant with the institutional guideline. The total number of patients receiving dexmedetomidine for greater than 24 hours was 13 (13.1%), of whom 10 (76.9%) received targeted interventions; 15 (15.2%) targeted interventions were made on all patients receiving dexmedetomidine during the study time frame. The total use of dexmedetomidine during the study period was 1310 vials, compared with 5404 vials during the equivalent time frame in 2010-a 76% reduction. CONCLUSIONS: A dexmedetomidine stewardship program, including an institution-specific prescribing guideline and a pharmacist-driven quality assurance program may ensure guideline compliance and decreased use of dexmedetomidine at an academic medical center.

Potential Impact of Subphenotyping in Pharmacologic Management of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

Background: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is an acute inflammatory process in the lungs associated with high morbidity and mortality. Previous research has studied both nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic interventions aimed at targeting this inflammatory process and improving ventilation. Hypothesis: To date, only nonpharmacologic interventions including lung protective ventilation, prone positioning, and high positive end-expiratory pressure ventilation strategies have resulted in significant improvements in patient outcomes. Given the high mortality associated with ARDS despite these advancements, interest in subphenotyping has grown, aiming to improve diagnosis and develop personalized treatment approaches. Data Collection: Previous trials evaluating pharmacologic therapies in heterogeneous populations have primarily demonstrated no positive effect, but hope to show benefit when targeting specific subphenotypes, thus increasing their efficacy, while simultaneously decreasing adverse effects. Results: Although most studies evaluating pharmacologic therapies for ARDS have not demonstrated a mortality benefit, there is limited data evaluating pharmacologic therapies in ARDS subphenotypes, which have found promising results. Neuromuscular blocking agents, corticosteroids, and simvastatin have resulted in a mortality benefit when used in patients with the hyper-inflammatory ARDS subphenotype. Therapeutic Opinion: The use of subphenotyping could revolutionize the way ARDS therapies are applied and therefore improve outcomes while also limiting the adverse effects associated with their ineffective use. Future studies should evaluate ARDS subphenotypes and their response to pharmacologic intervention to advance this area of precision medicine.