Sensory interventions to relieve dyspnoea in critically ill mechanically ventilated patients.

BACKGROUND: In critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation, dyspnoea is frequent, severe and associated with an increased risk of neuropsychological sequelae. We evaluated the efficacy of sensory interventions targeting the brain rather than the respiratory system to relieve dyspnoea in mechanically ventilated patients. METHODS: Patients receiving mechanical ventilation for ≥48 h and reporting dyspnoea (unidimensional dyspnoea visual analogue scale (Dyspnoea-VAS)) first underwent increased pressure support and then, in random order, auditory stimulation (relaxing music versus pink noise) and air flux stimulation (facial versus lower limb). Treatment responses were assessed using Dyspnoea-VAS, the Multidimensional Dyspnea Profile and measures of the neural drive to breathe (airway occlusion pressure (P 0.1) and electromyography of inspiratory muscles). RESULTS: We included 46 patients (tracheotomy or intubation n=37; noninvasive ventilation n=9). Increasing pressure support decreased Dyspnoea-VAS by median 40 mm (p<0.001). Exposure to music decreased Dyspnoea-VAS compared with exposure to pink noise by median 40 mm (p<0.001). Exposure to facial air flux decreased Dyspnoea-VAS compared with limb air flux by median 30 mm (p<0.001). Increasing pressure support, but not music exposure and facial air flux, reduced P 0.1 by median 3.3 cmH2O (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In mechanically ventilated patients, sensory interventions can modulate the processing of respiratory signals by the brain irrespective of the intensity of the neural drive to breathe. It should therefore be possible to alleviate dyspnoea without resorting to pharmacological interventions or having to infringe the constraints of mechanical ventilation lung protection strategies by increasing ventilatory support.

Neuroprognostication of Consciousness Recovery in a Patient with COVID-19 Related Encephalitis: Preliminary Findings from a Multimodal Approach.

Predicting the functional recovery of patients with severe neurological condition due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a challenging task. Only limited outcome data are available, the pathophysiology is poorly understood, and the time-course of recovery is still largely unknown. Here, we report the case of a patient with COVID-19 associated encephalitis presenting as a prolonged state of unresponsiveness for two months, who finally fully recovered consciousness, functional communication, and autonomy after immunotherapy. In a multimodal approach, a high-density resting state EEG revealed a rich brain activity in spite of a severe clinical presentation. Using our previously validated algorithms, we could predict a possible improvement of consciousness in this patient. This case report illustrates the value of a multimodal approach capitalizing on advanced brain-imaging and bedside electrophysiology techniques to improve prognosis accuracy in this complex and new aetiology.

Ultrasound shear wave elastography for assessing diaphragm function in mechanically ventilated patients: a breath-by-breath analysis.

BACKGROUND: Diaphragm dysfunction is highly prevalent in mechanically ventilated patients. Recent work showed that changes in diaphragm shear modulus (ΔSMdi) assessed using ultrasound shear wave elastography (SWE) are strongly related to changes in Pdi (ΔPdi) in healthy subjects. The aims of this study were to investigate the relationship between ΔSMdi and ΔPdi in mechanically ventilated patients, and whether ΔSMdi is responsive to change in respiratory load when varying the ventilator settings. METHODS: A prospective, monocentric study was conducted in a 15-bed ICU. Patients were included if they met the readiness-to-wean criteria. Pdi was continuously monitored using a double-balloon feeding catheter orally introduced. The zone of apposition of the right hemidiaphragm was imaged using a linear transducer (SL10-2, Aixplorer, Supersonic Imagine, France). Ultrasound recordings were performed under various pressure support settings and during a spontaneous breathing trial (SBT). A breath-by-breath analysis was performed, allowing the direct comparison between ΔPdi and ΔSMdi. Pearson's correlation coefficients (r) were used to investigate within-individual relationships between variables, and repeated measure correlations (R) were used for determining overall relationships between variables. Linear mixed models were used to compare breathing indices across the conditions of ventilation. RESULTS: Thirty patients were included and 930 respiratory cycles were analyzed. Twenty-five were considered for the analysis. A significant correlation was found between ΔPdi and ΔSMdi (R = 0.45, 95% CIs [0.35 0.54], p < 0.001). Individual correlation displays a significant correlation in 8 patients out of 25 (r = 0.55-0.86, all p < 0.05, versus r = - 0.43-0.52, all p > 0.06). Changing the condition of ventilation similarly affected ΔPdi and ΔSMdi. Patients in which ΔPdi-ΔSMdi correlation was non-significant had a faster respiratory rate as compared to that of patient with a significant ΔPdi-ΔSMdi relationship (median (Q1-Q3), 25 (18-33) vs. 21 (15-26) breaths.min-1, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that ultrasound SWE may be a promising surrogate to Pdi in mechanically ventilated patients. Respiratory rate appears to negatively impact SMdi measurement. Technological developments are needed to generalize this method in tachypneic patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03832231 .

Comparison of hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, and standard of care in critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia: an opportunistic retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak is spreading worldwide. To date, no specific treatment has convincingly demonstrated its efficacy. Hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir/ritonavir have potential interest, but virological and clinical data are scarce, especially in critically ill patients. METHODS: The present report took the opportunity of compassionate use and successive drug shortages to compare the effects of two therapeutic options, lopinavir/ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine, as compared to standard of care only. The primary outcomes were treatment escalation (intubation, extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation support, or renal replacement therapy) after day 1 until day 28. Secondary outcomes included ventilator-free days at day 28, mortality at day 14 and day 28, treatment safety issues and changes in respiratory tracts, and plasma viral load (as estimated by cycle threshold value) between admission and day 7. RESULTS: Eighty patients were treated during a 4-week period and included in the analysis: 22 (28%) received standard of care only, 20 (25%) patients received lopinavir/ritonavir associated to standard of care, and 38 (47%) patients received hydroxychloroquine and standard of care. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the 3 groups. Treatment escalation occurred in 9 (41%), 10 (50%), and 15 (39%) patients who received standard of care only, standard of care and lopinavir/ritonavir, and standard of care and hydroxychloroquine, respectively (p = 0.567). There was no significant difference between groups regarding the number of ventilator-free days at day 28 and mortality at day 14 and day 28. Finally, there was no significant change between groups in viral respiratory or plasma load between admission and day 7. CONCLUSION: In critically ill patients admitted for SARS-CoV-2-related pneumonia, no difference was found between hydroxychloroquine or lopinavir/ritonavir as compared to standard of care only on the proportion of patients who needed treatment escalation at day 28. Further randomized controlled trials are required to demonstrate whether these drugs may be useful in this context.