Determinants of acute kidney injury during high-power mechanical ventilation: secondary analysis from experimental data.

BACKGROUND: The individual components of mechanical ventilation may have distinct effects on kidney perfusion and on the risk of developing acute kidney injury; we aimed to explore ventilatory predictors of acute kidney failure and the hemodynamic changes consequent to experimental high-power mechanical ventilation. METHODS: Secondary analysis of two animal studies focused on the outcomes of different mechanical power settings, including 78 pigs mechanically ventilated with high mechanical power for 48 h. The animals were categorized in four groups in accordance with the RIFLE criteria for acute kidney injury (AKI), using the end-experimental creatinine: (1) NO AKI: no increase in creatinine; (2) RIFLE 1-Risk: increase of creatinine of > 50%; (3) RIFLE 2-Injury: two-fold increase of creatinine; (4) RIFLE 3-Failure: three-fold increase of creatinine; RESULTS: The main ventilatory parameter associated with AKI was the positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) component of mechanical power. At 30 min from the initiation of high mechanical power ventilation, the heart rate and the pulmonary artery pressure progressively increased from group NO AKI to group RIFLE 3. At 48 h, the hemodynamic variables associated with AKI were the heart rate, cardiac output, mean perfusion pressure (the difference between mean arterial and central venous pressures) and central venous pressure. Linear regression and receiving operator characteristic analyses showed that PEEP-induced changes in mean perfusion pressure (mainly due to an increase in CVP) had the strongest association with AKI. CONCLUSIONS: In an experimental setting of ventilation with high mechanical power, higher PEEP had the strongest association with AKI. The most likely physiological determinant of AKI was an increase of pleural pressure and CVP with reduced mean perfusion pressure. These changes resulted from PEEP per se and from increase in fluid administration to compensate for hemodynamic impairment consequent to high PEEP.

Differences in clinical characteristics and quantitative lung CT features between vaccinated and not vaccinated hospitalized COVID-19 patients in Italy.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the differences in the clinical characteristics and severity of lung impairment, assessed by quantitative lung CT scan, between vaccinated and non-vaccinated hospitalized patients with COVID-19; and to identify the variables with best prognostic prediction according to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination status. We recorded clinical, laboratory and quantitative lung CT scan data in 684 consecutive patients [580 (84.8%) vaccinated, and 104 (15.2%) non-vaccinated], admitted between January and December 2021. RESULTS: Vaccinated patients were significantly older 78 [69-84] vs 67 [53-79] years and with more comorbidities. Vaccinated and non-vaccinated patients had similar PaO2/FiO2 (300 [252-342] vs 307 [247-357] mmHg; respiratory rate 22 [8-26] vs 19 [18-26] bpm); total lung weight (918 [780-1069] vs 954 [802-1149] g), lung gas volume (2579 [1801-3628] vs 2370 [1675-3289] mL) and non-aerated tissue fraction (10 [7.3-16.0] vs 8.5 [6.0-14.1] %). The overall crude hospital mortality was similar between the vaccinated and non-vaccinated group (23.1% vs 21.2%). However, Cox regression analysis, adjusted for age, ethnicity, age unadjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index and calendar month of admission, showed a 40% reduction in hospital mortality in the vaccinated patients (HRadj = 0.60, 95%CI 0.38-0.95). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized vaccinated patients with COVID-19, although older and with more comorbidities, presented a similar impairment in gas exchange and lung CT scan compared to non-vaccinated patients, but were at a lower risk of mortality.

Pathophysiology of COVID-19 pneumonia and respiratory treatment.

COVID-19 pandemic has seen an unprecedented number of patients presenting with acute respiratory distress syndrome to the intensive care units all over the world. Between August and November 2022, we performed research on PubMed screening all publications on COVID-19 disease and respiratory failure and its treatment. In this review we focused on COVID-19 most common manifestations concerning lung function. The respiratory infection develops in three broad phases: early, intermediate, and late. The mainstay of the disease is the frequent presence of severe hypoxemia associated - at least at the beginning - to a near normal lung mechanics and PaCO2 tension. The management of symptomatic patients, progressing through these temporal phases, is not possible without understanding the pathophysiology underlying the respiratory manifestation.

High- versus Low-Flow Extracorporeal Respiratory Support in Experimental Hypoxemic Acute Lung Injury.

Rationale: In the EOLIA (ECMO to Rescue Lung Injury in Severe ARDS) trial, oxygenation was similar between intervention and conventional groups, whereas [Formula: see text]e was reduced in the intervention group. Comparable reductions in ventilation intensity are theoretically possible with low-flow extracorporeal CO2 removal (ECCO2R), provided oxygenation remains acceptable. Objectives: To compare the effects of ECCO2R and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) on gas exchange, respiratory mechanics, and hemodynamics in animal models of pulmonary (intratracheal hydrochloric acid) and extrapulmonary (intravenous oleic acid) lung injury. Methods: Twenty-four pigs with moderate to severe hypoxemia (PaO2:FiO2 ⩽ 150 mm Hg) were randomized to ECMO (blood flow 50-60 ml/kg/min), ECCO2R (0.4 L/min), or mechanical ventilation alone. Measurements and Main Results: [Formula: see text]o2, [Formula: see text]co2, gas exchange, hemodynamics, and respiratory mechanics were measured and are presented as 24-hour averages. Oleic acid versus hydrochloric acid showed higher extravascular lung water (1,424 ± 419 vs. 574 ± 195 ml; P < 0.001), worse oxygenation (PaO2:FiO2 = 125 ± 14 vs. 151 ± 11 mm Hg; P < 0.001), but better respiratory mechanics (plateau pressure 27 ± 4 vs. 30 ± 3 cm H2O; P = 0.017). Both models led to acute severe pulmonary hypertension. In both models, ECMO (3.7 ± 0.5 L/min), compared with ECCO2R (0.4 L/min), increased mixed venous oxygen saturation and oxygenation, and improved hemodynamics (cardiac output = 6.0 ± 1.4 vs. 5.2 ± 1.4 L/min; P = 0.003). [Formula: see text]o2 and [Formula: see text]co2, irrespective of lung injury model, were lower during ECMO, resulting in lower PaCO2 and [Formula: see text]e but worse respiratory elastance compared with ECCO2R (64 ± 27 vs. 40 ± 8 cm H2O/L; P < 0.001). Conclusions: ECMO was associated with better oxygenation, lower [Formula: see text]o2, and better hemodynamics. ECCO2R may offer a potential alternative to ECMO, but there are concerns regarding its effects on hemodynamics and pulmonary hypertension.

Ventilatory ratio, dead space, and venous admixture in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Ventilatory ratio (VR) has been proposed as an alternative approach to estimate physiological dead space. However, the absolute value of VR, at constant dead space, might be affected by venous admixture and CO2 volume expired per minute (VCO2). METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational study of mechanically ventilated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in the UK and Italy. Venous admixture was either directly measured or estimated using the surrogate measure PaO2/FiO2 ratio. VCO2 was estimated through the resting energy expenditure derived from the Harris-Benedict formula. RESULTS: A total of 641 mechanically ventilated patients with mild (n=65), moderate (n=363), or severe (n=213) ARDS were studied. Venous admixture was measured (n=153 patients) or estimated using the PaO2/FiO2 ratio (n=448). The VR increased exponentially as a function of the dead space, and the absolute values of this relationship were a function of VCO2. At a physiological dead space of 0.6, VR was 1.1, 1.4, and 1.7 in patients with VCO2 equal to 200, 250, and 300, respectively. VR was independently associated with mortality (odds ratio [OR]=2.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8-3.5), but was not associated when adjusted for VD/VTphys, VCO2, PaO2/FiO2 (ORadj=1.2; 95% CI, 0.7-2.1). These three variables remained independent predictors of ICU mortality (VD/VTphys [ORadj=17.9; 95% CI, 1.8-185; P<0.05]; VCO2 [ORadj=0.99; 95% CI, 0.99-1.00; P<0.001]; and PaO2/FiO2 (ORadj=0.99; 95% CI, 0.99-1.00; P<0.001]). CONCLUSIONS: VR is a useful aggregate variable associated with outcome, but variables not associated with ventilation (VCO2 and venous admixture) strongly contribute to the high values of VR seen in patients with severe illness.

Energy dissipation during expiration and ventilator-induced lung injury: an experimental animal study.

The amount of energy delivered to the respiratory system is recognized as a cause of ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI). How energy dissipation within the lung parenchyma causes damage is still a matter of debate. Expiratory flow control has been proposed as a strategy to reduce the energy dissipated into the respiratory system during expiration and, possibly, VILI. We studied 22 healthy pigs (29 ± 2 kg), which were randomized into a control (n = 11) and a valve group (n = 11), where the expiratory flow was controlled through a variable resistor. Both groups were ventilated with the same tidal volume, positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), and inspiratory flow. Electric impedance tomography was continuously acquired. At completion, lung weight, wet-to-dry ratios, and histology were evaluated. The total mechanical power was similar in the control and valve groups (8.54 ± 0.83 J·min-1 and 8.42 ± 0.54 J·min-1, respectively, P = 0.552). The total energy dissipated within the whole system (circuit + respiratory system) was remarkably different (4.34 ± 0.66 vs. 2.62 ± 0.31 J/min, P < 0.001). However, most of this energy was dissipated across the endotracheal tube (2.87 ± 0.3 vs. 1.88 ± 0.2 J/min, P < 0.001). The amount dissipated into the respiratory system averaged 1.45 ± 0.5 in controls versus 0.73 ± 0.16 J·min-1 in the valve group, P < 0.001. Although respiratory mechanics, gas exchange, hemodynamics, wet-to-dry ratios, and histology were similar in the two groups, the decrease of end-expiratory lung impedance was significantly greater in the control group (P = 0.02). We conclude that with our experimental conditions, the reduction of energy dissipated in the respiratory system did not lead to appreciable differences in VILI.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Energy dissipation within the respiratory system is a factor promoting ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI). In this animal study, we modulated the expiratory flow, reducing the energy dissipated in the system. However, this reduction happened mostly across the endotracheal tube, and only partly in the respiratory system. Therefore, in healthy lungs, the advantage in energy dissipation does not reduce VILI, but the advantages might be more relevant in diseased lungs under injurious ventilation.