Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 70, 2022 03 24.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35331323

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Excessive inspiratory effort could translate into self-inflicted lung injury, thus worsening clinical outcomes of spontaneously breathing patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF). Although esophageal manometry is a reliable method to estimate the magnitude of inspiratory effort, procedural issues significantly limit its use in daily clinical practice. The aim of this study is to describe the correlation between esophageal pressure swings (ΔPes) and nasal (ΔPnos) as a potential measure of inspiratory effort in spontaneously breathing patients with de novo ARF. METHODS: From January 1, 2021, to September 1, 2021, 61 consecutive patients with ARF (83.6% related to COVID-19) admitted to the Respiratory Intensive Care Unit (RICU) of the University Hospital of Modena (Italy) and candidate to escalation of non-invasive respiratory support (NRS) were enrolled. Clinical features and tidal changes in esophageal and nasal pressure were recorded on admission and 24 h after starting NRS. Correlation between ΔPes and ΔPnos served as primary outcome. The effect of ΔPnos measurements on respiratory rate and ΔPes was also assessed. RESULTS: ΔPes and ΔPnos were strongly correlated at admission (R2 = 0.88, p < 0.001) and 24 h apart (R2 = 0.94, p < 0.001). The nasal plug insertion and the mouth closure required for ΔPnos measurement did not result in significant change of respiratory rate and ΔPes. The correlation between measures at 24 h remained significant even after splitting the study population according to the type of NRS (high-flow nasal cannulas [R2 = 0.79, p < 0.001] or non-invasive ventilation [R2 = 0.95, p < 0.001]). CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of patients with ARF, nasal pressure swings did not alter respiratory mechanics in the short term and were highly correlated with esophageal pressure swings during spontaneous tidal breathing. ΔPnos might warrant further investigation as a measure of inspiratory effort in patients with ARF. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03826797 . Registered October 2016.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Ventilación no Invasiva , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria , Insuficiencia Respiratoria , Humanos , Respiración Artificial/métodos , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/terapia
2.
Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol ; 7(2): 395-403, 2022 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35434321

RESUMEN

Background: It is well known that benign tracheal stenosis represents an obstacle to open surgery, and that its treatment could be challenging. Two endoscopic techniques have so far been adopted to restore tracheal patency: balloon dilatation (BA) through laryngoscopy, and tracheal stenting (ST) with rigid bronchoscopy. The main objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of BA and ST to treat benign tracheal stenosis not eligible for surgery. We also compared the rate of adverse events in the two treatment groups. Methods: A retrospective, observational cohort study was carried out at the University Hospital of Modena (Italy) from November 2012 to November 2017 in two separate departments. Patients were considered to be "stabilized" (primary outcome) if they did not report significant respiratory symptoms, or restenosis in the long-term (2 years) following the endoscopic procedure. Results: Sixty-six patients were included in the study (33 in the BA and 33 in the ST group, respectively). Unadjusted Kaplan-Meier estimates showed a greater therapeutic effect of ST compared to BA at 2 years (hazard ratio = 3.9 95%CI [1.5-9.8], p = .01). After adjusting for confounders, stratified analyses showed that this effect was significant in patients with complex stenosis, idiopathic etiology, and degree of stenosis >70%. Compared with BA, ST showed a higher rate of adverse events (p = .01). Conclusions: Compared to BA, ST seems to be more effective in achieving stabilization of tracheal patency in complex benign tracheal stenosis, although burdened with a significantly higher number of adverse effects. These findings warrant future prospective study for confirmation. Level of evidence: 3.

3.
Front Pharmacol ; 12: 692551, 2021.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34290610

RESUMEN

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is one of the most aggressive forms of idiopathic interstitial pneumonias, characterized by chronic and progressive fibrosis subverting the lung's architecture, pulmonary functional decline, progressive respiratory failure, and high mortality (median survival 3 years after diagnosis). Among the mechanisms associated with disease onset and progression, it has been hypothesized that IPF lungs might be affected either by a regenerative deficit of the alveolar epithelium or by a dysregulation of repair mechanisms in response to alveolar and vascular damage. This latter might be related to the progressive dysfunction and exhaustion of the resident stem cells together with a process of cellular and tissue senescence. The role of endogenous mesenchymal stromal/stem cells (MSCs) resident in the lung in the homeostasis of these mechanisms is still a matter of debate. Although endogenous MSCs may play a critical role in lung repair, they are also involved in cellular senescence and tissue ageing processes with loss of lung regenerative potential. In addition, MSCs have immunomodulatory properties and can secrete anti-fibrotic factors. Thus, MSCs obtained from other sources administered systemically or directly into the lung have been investigated for lung epithelial repair and have been explored as a potential therapy for the treatment of lung diseases including IPF. Given these multiple potential roles of MSCs, this review aims both at elucidating the role of resident lung MSCs in IPF pathogenesis and the role of administered MSCs from other sources for potential IPF therapies.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA