Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Crit Care Med ; 52(1): 92-101, 2024 01 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37846935

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: The Berlin definition of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) was constructed for patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) with consideration given to issues related to reliability, feasibility, and validity. Notwithstanding, patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF) may be treated with high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) and may not fall within the scope of the original definition. We aimed to evaluate the predictive validity of the Berlin definition in HFNO-treated patients with COVID-19-related respiratory failure who otherwise met ARDS criteria. DESIGN: Multicenter, prospective cohort study. SETTING: Five ICUs of five centers in Argentina from March 2020 to September 2021. PATIENTS: We consecutively included HFNO-treated patients older than 18 years with confirmed COVID-19-related ARF, a Pa o2 /F io2 of less than 300 mm Hg, bilateral infiltrates on imaging, and worsening respiratory symptoms for less than 1 week. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We evaluated the predictive validity of mortality at day 28 using the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC), compared the predictive validity across subgroups, and characterized relevant clinical outcomes. We screened 1,231 patients and included 696 ARDS patients [30 (4%) mild, 380 (55%) moderate, and 286 (41%) severe]. For the study cohort, the AUC for mortality at day 28 was 0.606 (95% CI, 0.561-0.651) with the AUC for subgroups being similar to that of the overall cohort. Two hundred fifty-six patients (37%) received IMV. By day 28, 142 patients (21%) had died, of whom 81 (57%) had severe ARDS. Mortality occurred primarily in patients who were transitioned to IMV. CONCLUSIONS: The predictive validity of the Berlin ARDS definition was similar for HFNO-treated patients as compared with the original population of invasively ventilated patients. Our findings support the extension of the Berlin definition to HFNO-treated patients with ARDS.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria , Insuficiencia Respiratoria , Humanos , Estudios Prospectivos , Oxígeno , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , COVID-19/complicaciones , COVID-19/terapia , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria/diagnóstico , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria/terapia , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/diagnóstico , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/etiología , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/terapia
2.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 16, 2022 01 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34996496

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In patients with COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure (ARF), awake prone positioning (AW-PP) reduces the need for intubation in patients treated with high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO). However, the effects of different exposure times on clinical outcomes remain unclear. We evaluated the effect of AW-PP on the risk of endotracheal intubation and in-hospital mortality in patients with COVID-19-related ARF treated with HFNO and analyzed the effects of different exposure times to AW-PP. METHODS: This multicenter prospective cohort study in six ICUs of 6 centers in Argentine consecutively included patients > 18 years of age with confirmed COVID-19-related ARF requiring HFNO from June 2020 to January 2021. In the primary analysis, the main exposure was awake prone positioning for at least 6 h/day, compared to non-prone positioning (NON-PP). In the sensitivity analysis, exposure was based on the number of hours receiving AW-PP. Inverse probability weighting-propensity score (IPW-PS) was used to adjust the conditional probability of treatment assignment. The primary outcome was endotracheal intubation (ETI); and the secondary outcome was hospital mortality. RESULTS: During the study period, 580 patients were screened and 335 were included; 187 (56%) tolerated AW-PP for [median (p25-75)] 12 (9-16) h/day and 148 (44%) served as controls. The IPW-propensity analysis showed standardized differences < 0.1 in all the variables assessed. After adjusting for other confounders, the OR (95% CI) for ETI in the AW-PP group was 0.36 (0.2-0.7), with a progressive reduction in OR as the exposure to AW-PP increased. The adjusted OR (95% CI) for hospital mortality in the AW-PP group ≥ 6 h/day was 0.47 (0.19-1.31). The exposure to prone positioning ≥ 8 h/d resulted in a further reduction in OR [0.37 (0.17-0.8)]. CONCLUSION: In the study population, AW-PP for ≥ 6 h/day reduced the risk of endotracheal intubation, and exposure ≥ 8 h/d reduced the risk of hospital mortality.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Terapia por Inhalación de Oxígeno , Insuficiencia Respiratoria , Administración Intranasal , COVID-19/complicaciones , Humanos , Oxígeno/administración & dosificación , Terapia por Inhalación de Oxígeno/métodos , Posición Prona , Estudios Prospectivos , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/terapia , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/virología , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Vigilia
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...