[Positioning therapy for intensive care patients]. / Lagerungstherapie bei Intensivpatienten.

The current S3 guideline, "Positioning Therapy and Mobilization of Critically Ill Patients in Intensive Care Units", introduces methodological changes and substantive updates compared to the previous version. Additionally, new evidence-based insights with specified PICO questions have been integrated, aiming for a more precise application of recommendations in clinical practice and thus enhancing the care of critically ill patients.A notable aspect is the more nuanced approach to early mobilization, which is recommended to commence within the first 72 hours of ICU admission. A staged concept and score-based mobilization schema facilitate improved patient rehabilitation. Mobilization should be standard of care, i.e., immobilization should be ordered by the physician. The guideline provides suggestions for the duration and additional mobilization measures to ensure patients stand, transfer actively from bed to chair, or walk as frequently as possible. These recommendations apply even during ECMO therapy, highlighting the importance of early mobilization.Further updates include semi-recumbent positions of at least 40° in intubated patients, with careful consideration of potential side effects. Continuous lateral rotation therapy (CLRT) is not advised due to the progress in intensive care therapy, shifting from deep sedation toward responsive patient management.Prone positioning (PP) involves rotating the patient 180° onto the ventral side. It is recommended as a therapeutic option for invasively ventilated patients with ARDS and impaired arterial oxygenation (PaO2/FiO2 <150mmHg), with a recommended minimum duration of 12 hours, ideally 16 hours. Special recommendations apply, for example, to COVID-19 patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, where awake proning should be considered.Additionally, new chapters have been introduced focusing on assistive devices and neuromuscular electrical stimulation.

Barriers to female leadership in intensive care medicine: insights from an ESICM NEXT & Diversity Monitoring Group Survey.

BACKGROUND: The underrepresentation of women in leadership remains a pervasive issue, prompting a critical examination of support mechanisms within professional settings. Previous studies have identified challenges women face, ranging from limited visibility to barriers to career advancement. This survey aims to investigate perceptions regarding the effectiveness of women's leadership programs, mentoring initiatives, and a specialized communication course. Particularly it specifically targets addressing the challenges encountered by professional women. METHODS: This multi-center, observational, international online survey was developed in partnership between ESICM NEXT and the ESICM Diversity and Inclusiveness Monitoring Group for Healthcare. Invitations to participate were distributed to both females and men through emails and social networks. Data were collected from April 1, 2023, through October 1, 2023. RESULTS: Out of 354 respondents, 90 were men (25.42%) and 264 were women (74.58%). Among them, 251 completed the survey, shedding light on the persistent challenges faced by women in leadership roles, with 10%-50% of respondents holding such positions. Women's assertiveness is viewed differently, with 65% recognizing barriers such as harassment. Nearly half of the respondent's experience interruptions in meetings. Only 47.4% receiving conference invitations, with just over half accepting them. A mere 12% spoke at ESICM conferences in the last three years, receiving limited support from directors and colleagues, indicating varied obstacles for female professionals. Encouraging family participation, reducing fees, providing childcare, and offering economic support can enhance conference involvement. Despite 55% applying for ESICM positions, barriers like mobbing, harassment, lack of financial support, childcare, and language barriers were reported. Only 14% had access to paid family leave, while 32% benefited from subsidized childcare. Participation in the Effective Communication Course on Career Advancement Goals and engagement in women's leadership and mentoring programs could offer valuable insights and growth opportunities. Collaborating with Human Resources and leadership allies is crucial for overcoming barriers and promoting women's career growth. CONCLUSIONS: The urgency of addressing identified barriers to female leadership in intensive care medicine is underscored by the survey's comprehensive insights. A multifaceted and intersectional approach, considering sexism, structural barriers, and targeted strategies, is essential.

Functional outcome after interdisciplinary, acute rehabilitation in COVID-19 patients: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Survivors of severe COVID-19 often exhibit a variety of sequelae including loss of mobility and ADL (activities of daily living) capacity. Acute rehabilitation (AR) is an interdisciplinary rehabilitation intervention applied early while still in a hospital setting. The goal of AR is to improve functional limitations and to increase functional independence at discharge. It is established in the treatment of patients with other severe diseases such as sepsis, polytrauma, or stroke. Data concerning AR in COVID-19 are sparse. AIM: To evaluate the changes in physical function during AR in patients after severe COVID-19. METHODS: This monocentric, retrospective observational study examined the functional outcomes of a sample of COVID-19-patients who received interdisciplinary AR at a university hospital. Inclusion criteria were a positive SARS-CoV-2 test in 05/2020-01/2022 and transfer to AR after intensive care treatment. 87 patients were elegible for evaluation, 3 of whom were excluded because of death during AR. Data were extracted from the hospital information system. In a pre-post analysis, mobility (Charité Mobility Index), ADL (Barthel Index), and oxygen demand were assessed. In addition, discharge location after AR, factors associated with AR unit length of stay, and functional improvements were analyzed. RESULTS: Data of 84 patients were analyzed. Mobility increased significantly from a median of 4 [1.25-6] CHARMI points at admission to a median of 9 [8.25-9] at discharge (p < 0.001). ADL increased significantly from a median of 52.5 [35.0-68.75] Barthel Index points at admission to a median of 92.5 [85-95] at discharge (p < 0.001). Oxygen demand decreased from 80.7 to 30.5% of patients. The majority (55.9%) of patients were discharged home, while 36.9% received direct follow-up rehabilitation. Older age correlated significantly with lower scores on the discharge assessment for mobility (Spearman's ϱ = -0.285, p = 0.009) and ADL (Spearman's ϱ = -0.297, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Acute rehabilitation is a viable option for COVID-19 patients with severe functional deficits after ICU treatment to achieve functional progress in mobility and ADL, reduce oxygen requirements and enable follow-up rehabilitation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER AND DATE OF REGISTRATION FOR PROSPECTIVELY REGISTERED TRIALS: Trial registration number: DRKS00025239. Date of registration: 08 Sep 2021.

Prospective multicenter study to describe the prevalence, outcomes, and management of phosphate disorders in intensive care patients: Study protocol for part B of the international GUTPHOS study.

BACKGROUND: Aberrations in blood phosphate (Pi) levels, whether presenting as hypo- or hyperphosphatemia, appear to be associated with clinical complications and adverse outcomes in patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). However, the prevalence of Pi disorders and the association with subsequent factors and organ failures leading to death in ICU patients are poorly described. Despite endeavors to understand the etiology and treatment of low Pi levels from systematic reviews and meta-analyses, the literature lacks comprehensive guidance for managing hypophosphatemia. Hyperphosphatemia, on the other hand, appears to be associated with higher mortality among critically ill patients, yet its prevalence among ICU patients, particularly following phosphate repletion, remains unknown. The present study aims to investigate the prevalence of Pi abnormalities upon ICU admission and their incidence during the first week of ICU stay, the factors associated with Pi alterations, and the effect of phosphate repletion on the normalization of Pi levels, and its associations with clinical outcomes. METHODS: This multicentre, prospective, non-interventional cohort study will include at least 1000 consecutive adult ICU patients (≥18 years) as part B of the GUTPHOS study. Sites are eligible if an anticipated minimal inclusion of 50 eligible patients during eight weeks from January 2024 until June 2024 and daily phosphate measurements during the first seven days of ICU stay are expected. All consecutive adult patients admitted to a participating ICU during the recruitment period, lasting up to eight weeks, or up to 120 patients if enrollment reaches that limit earlier, will be included. Study parameters include study site characteristics, patient demographics, daily assessment of Pi levels, Pi-related treatment, feeding details, renal replacement therapy details, the incidence of refeeding-associated hypophosphatemia and administered medication (during the first seven calendar days of ICU stay). There will be a follow-up period of a maximum of 90 days to document 28- and 90-day all-cause mortality as the primary outcome. Multiple logistic regression will be used to assess independent associations with mortality in addition to Receiver Operating Characteristics curves to identify cut-off Pi values associated with mortality and overcorrection. Linear mixed models will be conducted to assess Pi treatment effects. Subgroup analyses will be performed based on Pi abnormalities observed during ICU admission, categorized as normo-, hypo-, hyper-, or mixed, along with its severity (mild, moderate, or severe). DISCUSSION: The GUTPHOS study will be the first multicentre, prospective observational cohort study to investigate the prevalence, management practices, and consequent outcomes associated with Pi abnormalities during the first week of ICU admission. Its results may bridge the current evidence gap in repletion protocols while establishing the groundwork for a subsequent randomized controlled trial. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY: NCT05909722.

Prospective multicenter study to validate the gastrointestinal dysfunction score (GIDS) in intensive care patients: Study protocol for Part A of the international GUTPHOS study.

BACKGROUND: While gastrointestinal (GI) dysfunction is commonly encountered among critically ill patients, a uniform prospectively validated scoring system is lacking. The present study aims to validate the recently developed Gastrointestinal Dysfunction Score (GIDS) in a multicenter, prospective cohort of consecutive adult patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU). METHODS: GUTPHOS is a prospective, multicenter, non-interventional cohort study in which at least 1400 consecutive adult patients (age ≥18 years) admitted to the ICU will be monitored daily for abdominal signs and symptoms of GI dysfunction. The previously developed GIDS constructed from these signs and symptoms will be tested in relation to mortality and duration of ICU dependency and parenteral nutrition (PN) dependency. Between January and June 2024, each participating clinical site will include 50-120 consecutive patients over an eight-week period. Study data will be collected in three phases: baseline data upon ICU admission, daily observations throughout a maximum of 7 days in ICU or until discharge, and a follow-up period of 90 days. The primary outcomes are 28- and 90-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes include ICU and hospital mortality, ICU and hospital length of stay, days alive and free of ICU by day 28 and day 90, days alive and free of hospital by day 28 and day 90, and days alive and free of organ support and PN dependency by day 28. DISCUSSION: The GUTPHOS study will be the first worldwide, multicenter, prospective, observational cohort study to validate the GIDS in adult patients admitted to ICUs against 28- and 90-day mortality. The availability of a validated tool will allow its use in interventional studies that are currently hindered by the lack of a validated measurement tool for GI dysfunction. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY: NCT05909722.

Guideline on positioning and early mobilisation in the critically ill by an expert panel.

A scientific panel was created consisting of 23 interdisciplinary and interprofessional experts in intensive care medicine, physiotherapy, nursing care, surgery, rehabilitative medicine, and pneumology delegated from scientific societies together with a patient representative and a delegate from the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies who advised methodological implementation. The guideline was created according to the German Association of the Scientific Medical Societies (AWMF), based on The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II. The topics of (early) mobilisation, neuromuscular electrical stimulation, assist devices for mobilisation, and positioning, including prone positioning, were identified as areas to be addressed and assigned to specialist expert groups, taking conflicts of interest into account. The panel formulated PICO questions (addressing the population, intervention, comparison or control group as well as the resulting outcomes), conducted a systematic literature review with abstract screening and full-text analysis and created summary tables. This was followed by grading the evidence according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine 2011 Levels of Evidence and a risk of bias assessment. The recommendations were finalized according to GRADE and voted using an online Delphi process followed by a final hybrid consensus conference. The German long version of the guideline was approved by the professional associations. For this English version an update of the systematic review was conducted until April 2024 and recommendation adapted based on new evidence in systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials. In total, 46 recommendations were developed and research gaps addressed.

[Anaesthesiological Management of Traumatic Brain Injury]. / Anästhesiologisches Management bei Schädel-Hirn-Trauma.

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is the main cause of death in people < 45 years in industrial countries. Minimising secondary injury to the injured brain is the primary goal throughout the entire treatment. Anaesthesiologic procedures aim at the reconstitution of cerebral perfusion and homeostasis. Both TBI itself as well as accompanying injuries show effects on cardiac and pulmonary function. Time management plays a crucial role in ensuring a safe anaesthesiologic environment while minimizing unnecessary procedures. Furthermore, growing medical drug pre-treatment demands for further knowledge e.g., in antagonization of anticoagulation.

[Neurosurgical Management of Traumatic Brain Injury]. / Neurochirurgisches Management bei Schädel-Hirn-Trauma.

The neurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury (TBI) plays a critical role in ensuring acute survival and mitigating secondary brain damage, which significantly impacts patients' quality of life. TBI is defined as an external force impacting the skull, leading to brain injuries and subsequent functional impairments. It is a leading cause of mortality and morbidity, particularly among young individuals. The initial clinical examination is crucial, with external signs like scalp injuries, hematomas, nasal fluid leakage, skull deformities, and neurological deficits providing important clues to injury patterns. Pupil examination is particularly critical, as mydriasis coupled with reduced consciousness may indicate an acute life-threatening increase in intracranial pressure (ICP), necessitating immediate neurosurgical intervention. TBI assessment often utilizes the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), classifying injuries as mild (GCS 13-15), moderate (GCS 9-12), or severe (GCS < 9). Even mild TBI can lead to long-term complications. TBI should be viewed as a disease process rather than a singular event. Primary brain damage results from shearing forces on the parenchyma, manifesting as contusions, hematomas, or diffuse axonal injury. Secondary brain damage is driven by mechanisms such as inflammation and spreading depolarizations. Treatment aims not only to secure immediate survival but also to reduce secondary injuries, with ICP management being crucial. Neurosurgical interventions are guided by cranial pathologies, with options including ICP monitoring, burr hole trepanation, craniotomy. In severe TBI cases with refractory ICP elevation, decompressive craniectomy may be performed as a last resort, significantly reducing mortality but often resulting in high morbidity and vegetative states, necessitating careful consideration of indications.

Impact of High Dose Early Mobilization on Outcomes for Patients with Diabetes: A Secondary Analysis of the TEAM Trial.

RATIONALE: Patients with diabetes represent almost 20% of all ICU admissions and might respond differently to high dose early active mobilization. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether diabetes modified the relationship between the dose of early mobilization on clinical outcomes in the TEAM trial. METHODS: All TEAM trial patients were included. The primary outcome was days alive and out of hospital at day 180. Secondary outcomes included 180-day mortality and long-term functional outcomes at day 180. Logistic and median regression models were used to explore the effect of high dose early mobilization on outcomes by diabetes status. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: All 741 patients from the original trial were included. Of these, 159 patients (21.4%) had diabetes. Patients with diabetes had a lower number of days alive and out of hospital at day 180 (124 [0-153] vs. 147 [82-164], p = 0.013), and higher 180-day mortality (30% vs. 18%, p = 0.044). In patients receiving high dose early mobilization, days alive and out of hospital at day 180 was 73.0 (0.0 - 144.5) in patients with diabetes and 146.5 (95.8 - 163.0) in patients without diabetes (p for interaction = 0.108). However, in patients with diabetes, high dose early mobilization increased the odds of mortality at 180 days (adjusted odds ratio 3.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.67-7.61, p value for interaction, 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this secondary analysis of the TEAM trial, in patients with diabetes, a high dose early mobilization strategy did not significantly decrease the number of days alive and out of hospital at day 180 but it increased 180-day mortality.

Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of prehabilitation for elderly frail patients prior to elective surgery: a qualitative study with healthcare professionals.

BACKGROUND: Prehabilitation aims to enhance functional capacity before surgery, minimise complications and achieve a better postoperative outcome. This can be particularly useful for older, frail patients to better tolerate surgery. The aim of this study was to identify what barriers and facilitators healthcare professionals in Germany experienced in the implementation and delivery of the multimodal prehabilitation programme "PRAEP-GO" for (pre-)frail adults aged 70 years and older to inform the implementation of prehabilitation into standard care. METHODS: A nested descriptive qualitative study was conducted using semi-structured face-to-face interviews with healthcare professionals involved in the PRAEP-GO trial from the Berlin and Brandenburg region in Germany. Transcripts were analysed using Kuckartz' qualitative content analysis. Results were interpreted and synthesised using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, a theoretical framework to allow their application to a more general context. RESULTS: A total of 14 interviews were conducted. Seven therapists (physio-, ergo-, sports therapy), five physicians and two employees from other professions with mainly administrative and organisational tasks in the project. All identified barriers and facilitating factors could be assigned to the themes of organisation, prehabilitation, cooperation and communication between healthcare professionals and with patients. Much optimisation potential was found regarding organisational aspects, e.g. addressing perceived staff shortages and optimising the patient pathway. Furthermore, it became apparent that communication and cooperation between professionals but also with patients need to be improved. More evidence regarding prehabilitation should be provided to convince professionals more. Prehabilitation should be multimodal and individualised, including the programme duration. Officially introducing prehabilitation into standard care would facilitate its delivery. DISCUSSION: These findings underscore the fact that successful implementation of prehabilitation programmes, such as PRAEP-GO, requires sufficient organisational infrastructure, human resources, access to knowledge, an adaptable and individualised programme design as well as good communication among professionals and with patients. The transferability of the findings is limited by the absence of nutritionists and resulting overrepresentation of other therapists in the sample. To further convince professionals and patients of the concept of prehabilitation, more research is needed to build a solid evidence base that will ensure greater awareness and, thus, more motivation and cooperation among professionals and patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework (osf.io/ksfgj).

Noninvasive Electromagnetic Phrenic Nerve Stimulation in Critically Ill Patients: A Feasibility Study.

BACKGROUND: Electromagnetic stimulation of the phrenic nerve induces diaphragm contractions, but no coils for clinical use have been available. We recently demonstrated the feasibility of ventilation using bilateral transcutaneous noninvasive electromagnetic phrenic nerve stimulation (NEPNS) before surgery in lung-healthy patients with healthy weight in a dose-dependent manner. RESEARCH QUESTION: Is NEPNS feasible in critically ill patients in an ICU setting? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This feasibility nonrandomized controlled study aimed to enroll patients within 36 h of intubation who were expected to remain ventilated for ≥ 72 h. The intervention group received 15-min bilateral transcutaneous NEPNS bid, whereas the control group received standard care. If sufficient, NEPNS was used without pressure support to ventilate the patient; pressure support was added if necessary to ventilate the patient adequately. The primary outcome was feasibility, measured as time to find the optimal stimulation position. Further end points were sessions performed according to the protocol or allowing a next-day catch-up session and tidal volume achieved with stimulation reaching only 3 to 6 mL/kg ideal body weight (IBW). A secondary end point was expiratory diaphragm thickness measured with ultrasound from days 1 to 10 (or extubation). RESULTS: The revised European Union regulation mandated reapproval of medical devices, prematurely halting the study. Eleven patients (five in the intervention group, six in the control group) were enrolled. The median time to find an adequate stimulation position was 23 s (interquartile range, 12-62 s). The intervention bid was executed in 87% of patients, and 92% of patients including a next-day catch-up session. Ventilation with 3 to 6 mL/kg IBW was achieved in 732 of 1,701 stimulations (43.0%) with stimulation only and in 2,511 of 4,036 stimulations (62.2%) with additional pressure support. A decrease in diaphragm thickness was prevented by bilateral NEPNS (P = .034) until day 10. INTERPRETATION: Bilateral transcutaneous NEPNS was feasible in the ICU setting with the potential benefit of preventing diaphragm atrophy during mechanical ventilation. NEPNS ventilation effectiveness needs further assessment. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT05238753; URL: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov.

Facilitators and barriers to the implementation of prehabilitation for frail patients into routine health care: a realist review.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence supporting the effectiveness of prehabilitation as a new preoperative care pathway to optimise perioperative outcomes, its implementation into routine health care is widely pending. Frail patients might particularly benefit from prehabilitation interventions, but facilitating and hindering factors need to be considered in the implementation process. Thus, our aim was to derive a programme theory on what prehabilitation programmes work for frail patients in what circumstances and why. METHODS: Following Pawson's realist review approach, preliminary programme theories on facilitators and barriers were established. General and topic-specific databases were searched systematically for facilitators and barriers to the implementation of prehabilitation for frail patients. Articles were included if they dealt with multimodal prehabilitation programmes prior to surgery in a frail population and if they contained information on facilitators and barriers during the implementation process in the full text. Based on these articles, refined programme theories were generated. RESULTS: From 2,609 unique titles, 34 were retained for the realist synthesis. Facilitating factors included the individualisation of prehabilitation programmes to meet the patients' needs and abilities, multimodality, adaption to the local setting and health care system, endorsement by an ambassador and sharing of responsibilities among a multidisciplinary team. Central barriers for frail patients were transportation, lack of social support, and inadequate, overwhelming information provision. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing prehabilitation as a new care pathway for frail patients requires organisational readiness and adaptability to the local setting. On an individual level, a clear understanding of responsibilities and of the intervention's goal among patients and providers are necessary. Added attention must be paid to the individualisation to fit the needs and restrictions of frail patients. This makes prehabilitation a resource-intense, but promising intervention for frail surgery patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42022335282).

Robotic-Assisted In-Bed Mobilization in Ventilated ICU Patients With COVID-19: An Interventional, Randomized, Controlled Pilot Study (ROBEM II Study).

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic significantly impacted global healthcare systems, particularly in managing critically ill mechanically ventilated patients. This study aims to assess the feasibility of robotic-assisted mobilization in COVID-19 patients. DESIGN: Randomized controlled pilot study. SETTING: Four COVID-19 specialized ICUs at Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin (March 2021 to February 2022). PATIENTS: Twenty critically ill COVID-19 patients expected to require greater than 24 hours of ventilation. INTERVENTIONS: A 5-day intervention phase with bid robotic-assisted mobilization greater than or equal to 20 minutes and follow-up at day 180, compared with standard care. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Intervention sessions were conducted in 98.9% according to protocol, with one session missing due to staff shortage. Primary outcome was the mobilization level measured with the ICU Mobility Scale (IMS) and Surgical ICU Optimal Mobilization Score (SOMS), assessed until day 5 or extubation. Safety events were recorded during mobilization. The median IMS and SOMS were 0 (0-0.16) and 1 (1-1.03) in the intervention group, and 0 (0-0.15) ( p = 0.77) and 0.8 (0.65-1.20) ( p = 0.08) in the standard care group, respectively. Significant secondary outcomes included average number of mobilization sessions (intervention: 8.5 [7.75-10] vs. standard care: 4.5 [3.5-5]; p = 0.001), total mobilization time (intervention: 232.5 min [187.25-266.5 min] vs. standard care: 147.5 min [107.5-167.5 min]; p = 0.011), and healthcare providers per session (intervention: 2 [2-2] vs. standard care: 1 [1-1.4]; p = 0.001) during intervention. Four safety events (hypertension and agitation, n = 2 each) in the intervention group and none in the standard care group were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic-assisted mobilization in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients appears to be safe and feasible.

Phrenic nerve stimulation to prevent diaphragmatic dysfunction and ventilator-induced lung injury.

Side effects of mechanical ventilation, such as ventilator-induced diaphragmatic dysfunction (VIDD) and ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI), occur frequently in critically ill patients. Phrenic nerve stimulation (PNS) has been a valuable tool for diagnosing VIDD by assessing respiratory muscle strength in response to magnetic PNS. The detection of pathophysiologically reduced respiratory muscle strength is correlated with weaning failure, longer mechanical ventilation time, and mortality. Non-invasive electromagnetic PNS designed for diagnostic use is a reference technique that allows clinicians to measure transdiaphragm pressure as a surrogate parameter for diaphragm strength and functionality. This helps to identify diaphragm-related issues that may impact weaning readiness and respiratory support requirements, although lack of lung volume measurement poses a challenge to interpretation. In recent years, therapeutic PNS has been demonstrated as feasible and safe in lung-healthy and critically ill patients. Effects on critically ill patients' VIDD or diaphragm atrophy outcomes are the subject of ongoing research. The currently investigated application forms are diverse and vary from invasive to non-invasive and from electrical to (electro)magnetic PNS, with most data available for electrical stimulation. Increased inspiratory muscle strength and improved diaphragm activity (e.g., excursion, thickening fraction, and thickness) indicate the potential of the technique for beneficial effects on clinical outcomes as it has been successfully used in spinal cord injured patients. Concerning the potential for electrophrenic respiration, the data obtained with non-invasive electromagnetic PNS suggest that the induced diaphragmatic contractions result in airway pressure swings and tidal volumes remaining within the thresholds of lung-protective mechanical ventilation. PNS holds significant promise as a therapeutic intervention in the critical care setting, with potential applications for ameliorating VIDD and the ability for diaphragm training in a safe lung-protective spectrum, thereby possibly reducing the risk of VILI indirectly. Outcomes of such diaphragm training have not been sufficiently explored to date but offer the perspective for enhanced patient care and reducing weaning failure. Future research might focus on using PNS in combination with invasive and non-invasive assisted ventilation with automatic synchronisation and the modulation of PNS with spontaneous breathing efforts. Explorative approaches may investigate the feasibility of long-term electrophrenic ventilation as an alternative to positive pressure-based ventilation.

Outcomes in critically ill patients after diaphragmatic stimulation on ventilator-induced diaphragmatic dysfunction: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Mechanical ventilation (MV) is a lifesaving procedure for critically ill patients. Diaphragm activation and stimulation may counteract side effects, such as ventilator-induced diaphragm dysfunction (VIDD). The effects of stimulation on diaphragm atrophy and patient outcomes are reported in this systematic review. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Studies investigating diaphragmatic stimulation versus standard of care in critically ill patients and evaluating clinical outcomes were extracted from a Medline database last on January 23, 2023, after registration in Prospero (CRD42021259353). Selected studies included the investigation of diaphragmatic stimulation versus standard of care in critically ill patients, an evaluation of the clinical outcomes. These included muscle atrophy, VIDD, weaning failure, mortality, quality of life, ventilation time, diaphragmatic function, length of stay in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), and length of hospital stay. All articles were independently evaluated by two reviewers according to their abstract and title and, secondly, a full texts evaluation by two independent reviewers was performed. To resolve diverging evaluations, a third reviewer was consulted to reach a final decision. Data were extracted by the reviewers following the Oxford 2011 levels of evidence guidelines and summarized accordingly. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Seven studies were extracted and descriptively synthesized, since a metanalysis was not feasible. Patients undergoing diaphragm stimulation had moderate evidence of higher maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP), less atrophy, less mitochondrial respiratory dysfunction, less oxidative stress, less molecular atrophy, shorter MV time, shorter ICU length of stay, longer survival, and better SF-36 scores than control. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence of the molecular and histological benefits of diaphragmatic stimulation is limited. The results indicate positive clinical effects of diaphragm activation with a moderate level of evidence for MIP and a low level of evidence for other outcomes. Diaphragm activation could be a therapeutic solution to avoid diaphragm atrophy, accelerate weaning, shorten MV time, and counteract VIDD; however, better-powered studies are needed to increase the level of evidence.