Awake pronation with helmet continuous positive airway pressure for COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients outside the ICU: A case series.

OBJECTIVE: Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is an important therapeutic tool in COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) since it improves oxygenation, reduces respiratory rate and can prevent intubation and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. CPAP during pronation has seldom been described and never during sedation. DESIGN: Case series. SETTING: High dependency unit of San Carlo University Hospital (Potenza, Italy). PATIENTS: Eleven consecutive patients with COVID-19 ARDS. INTERVENTION: Helmet CPAP in prone position after failing a CPAP trial in the supine position. MAIN VARIABLE OF INTEREST: Data collection at baseline and then after 24, 48 and 72h of pronation. We measured PaO2/FIO2, pH, lactate, PaCO2, SpO2, respiratory rate and the status of the patients at 28-day follow up. RESULTS: Patients were treated with helmet CPAP for a mean±SD of 7±2.7 days. Prone positioning was feasible in all patients, but in 7 of them dexmedetomidine improved comfort. PaO2/FIO2 improved from 107.5±20.8 before starting pronation to 244.4±106.2 after 72h (p<.001). We also observed a significantly increase in Sp02 from 90.6±2.3 to 96±3.1 (p<.001) and a decrease in respiratory rate from 27.6±4.3 to 20.1±4.7 (p=.004). No difference was observed in PaCO2 or pH. At 28 days two patients died after ICU admission, one was discharged in the main ward after ICU admission and eight were discharged home after being successfully managed outside the ICU. CONCLUSIONS: Helmet CPAP during pronation was feasible and safe in COVID-19 ARDS managed outside the ICU and sedation with dexmedetomidine safely improved comfort. We recorded an increase in PaO2/FIO2, SpO2 and a reduction in respiratory rate.

Awake pronation with helmet continuous positive airway pressure for COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients outside the ICU: A case series / Pronación en la planta en pacientes despiertos conectados a ventilación mecánica no invasiva y casco, con insuficiencia respiratoria aguda secundaria a COVID-19: una serie de casos

Objective: Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is an important therapeutic tool in COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) since it improves oxygenation, reduces respiratory rate and can prevent intubation and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. CPAP during pronation has seldom been described and never during sedation.DesignCase series.SettingHigh dependency unit of San Carlo University Hospital (Potenza, Italy).PatientsEleven consecutive patients with COVID-19 ARDS.InterventionHelmet CPAP in prone position after failing a CPAP trial in the supine position.Main variable of interestData collection at baseline and then after 24, 48 and 72h of pronation. We measured PaO2/FIO2, pH, lactate, PaCO2, SpO2, respiratory rate and the status of the patients at 28-day follow up.ResultsPatients were treated with helmet CPAP for a mean±SD of 7±2.7 days. Prone positioning was feasible in all patients, but in 7 of them dexmedetomidine improved comfort. PaO2/FIO2 improved from 107.5±20.8 before starting pronation to 244.4±106.2 after 72h (p<.001). We also observed a significantly increase in Sp02 from 90.6±2.3 to 96±3.1 (p<.001) and a decrease in respiratory rate from 27.6±4.3 to 20.1±4.7 (p=.004). No difference was observed in PaCO2 or pH. At 28 days two patients died after ICU admission, one was discharged in the main ward after ICU admission and eight were discharged home after being successfully managed outside the ICU.Conclusions: Helmet CPAP during pronation was feasible and safe in COVID-19 ARDS managed outside the ICU and sedation with dexmedetomidine safely improved comfort. We recorded an increase in PaO2/FIO2, SpO2 and a reduction in respiratory rate (AU)

Objetivo: La ventilación con presión positiva continua (CPAP) es una opción terapéutica útil en pacientes con síndrome de dificultad respiratoria aguda (SDRA) secundaria a infección por coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) porque mejora la oxigenación, disminuye la frecuencia respiratoria y puede prevenir la intubación orotraqueal y así la admisión en la unidad de cuidados intensivos (UCI). El uso de la CPAP en pronación se ha descrito raramente, y nunca en pacientes con sedación superficial.DiseñoSerie de casos.ÁmbitoUnidad de cuidados intensivos del Hospital San Carlo (Potenza, Italia).PacientesOnce casos consecutivos de pacientes con SDRA secundario a infección por COVID-19.IntervencionesCasco y CPAP y en posición de prono, después de fracasar una sesión de una hora de CPAP en posición supina.Variables de interés principalesDatos clínicos registrados antes de iniciar la primera sesión de 12h de pronación y a las 24, 48 y 72h. Los datos registrados fueron PaO2/FiO2, pH, lactatos, PaCO2, SpO2, frecuencia respiratoria y visita de seguimiento a los 28días.ResultadosTodos los pacientes fueron tratados con CPAP y casco durante una media ±DE de 7±2,7. La posición de prono se realizó con éxito en los 11 pacientes, pero 7 pacientes recibieron dexmetodomidina para mejorar el confort.El valor de PaO2/FiO2 mejoró desde 107,5±20,8 antes de la pronación hasta 244,4±106,2 después de 72h (p<0,001). Se observó un aumento significativo de la SpO2 desde un basal de 90,6±2,3 hasta 96±3,1 a las 72h (p<0,001) y una reducción de la frecuencia respiratoria desde 27,6±4,3 hasta 20,1±4,7 (p=0,004). No se observaron diferencias en los valores de PaCO2 o de pH. A los 28días dos pacientes habían fallecido, uno permanecía todavía ingresado en la planta después de la dimisión de la UCI y ocho fueron remitidos al domicilio después de ser tratados en la planta sin necesidad de ingreso en la UCI.Conclusio: nesLa CPAP con casco durante la posición de prono fue segura y eficaz

Awake pronation with helmet continuous positive airway pressure for COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients outside the ICU: A case series.

OBJECTIVE: Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is an important therapeutic tool in COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) since it improves oxygenation, reduces respiratory rate and can prevent intubation and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. CPAP during pronation has seldom been described and never during sedation. DESIGN: Case series. SETTING: High dependency unit of San Carlo University Hospital (Potenza, Italy). PATIENTS: Eleven consecutive patients with COVID-19 ARDS. INTERVENTION: Helmet CPAP in prone position after failing a CPAP trial in the supine position. MAIN VARIABLE OF INTEREST: Data collection at baseline and then after 24, 48 and 72h of pronation. We measured PaO2/FIO2, pH, lactate, PaCO2, SpO2, respiratory rate and the status of the patients at 28-day follow up. RESULTS: Patients were treated with helmet CPAP for a mean±SD of 7±2.7 days. Prone positioning was feasible in all patients, but in 7 of them dexmedetomidine improved comfort. PaO2/FIO2 improved from 107.5±20.8 before starting pronation to 244.4±106.2 after 72h (p<.001). We also observed a significantly increase in Sp02 from 90.6±2.3 to 96±3.1 (p<.001) and a decrease in respiratory rate from 27.6±4.3 to 20.1±4.7 (p=.004). No difference was observed in PaCO2 or pH. At 28 days two patients died after ICU admission, one was discharged in the main ward after ICU admission and eight were discharged home after being successfully managed outside the ICU. CONCLUSIONS: Helmet CPAP during pronation was feasible and safe in COVID-19 ARDS managed outside the ICU and sedation with dexmedetomidine safely improved comfort. We recorded an increase in PaO2/FIO2, SpO2 and a reduction in respiratory rate.

Non invasive ventilation in surgical patients: definitely yes, but wisely please / Ventilación no invasiva en pacientes quirúrgicos: por supuesto que sí, pero con prudencia

No disponible

Critical care in the near future: patient-centered, beyond space and time boundaries.

Modern Critical Care aims at improving patient-centered outcomes, not limited to survival. Recently, along with traditional research evaluating single drugs or procedures, more elusive elements have been evaluated, like organizational and teamwork aspects, delivery of critical care before Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission and after discharge. The aim of this review is to offer an up-to-date, comprehensive, and maybe "visionary" big picture of Critical Care in the near future beyond its traditional boundaries. In particular, we wish to suggest key elements that will allow a leap forward in terms of quality of care. Patient-centeredness will be the main issue, taking the patient's wishes into account more than in the past. This means improving communication with patients and their relatives, and pursuing a holistic approach: we should pay more attention to natural light, noise reduction, music, prevention of sleep fragmentation, soft colors for walls, privacy, psychological support. An open visiting policy should be the standard. End-of-Life practices should become centered on patient wishes and dignity. Rapid response teams will bring timely critical care services to patients outside ICUs, preventing avoidable adverse events and unplanned ICU admission. In ICU, standardized protocols, checklists, daily goals sheets, advanced information technology and multidisciplinary rounds will improve quality of care and safety. Multicenter studies will be made easier and research should become part of daily practice in most ICU. Finally, the post ICU syndrome should be prevented and treated by a well-designed longitudinal care model taking care of patients from the ICU to the outpatient setting.

Propofol and survival: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: One of the most commonly used hypnotics is propofol. Several studies performed in cardiac surgery suggested an increased mortality in patients receiving a propofol-based total intravenous anaesthesia. Furthermore, the possibility of infections and the 'propofol syndrome' have suggested that propofol might be dangerous. Nonetheless, propofol is widely used in different settings because of its characteristics: fast induction, rapid elimination, short duration of action, smooth recovery from anaesthesia, few adverse effects, no teratogenic effects, characteristics that have undoubtedly contributed to its popularity. The effect of propofol on survival is unknown. We decided to carry out a meta-analysis of all randomized controlled studies ever performed on propofol vs. any comparator in any clinical setting. METHODS: Pertinent studies were independently searched in BioMedCentral, PubMed, Embase, Clinicaltrial.gov, and Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials by expert investigators. The following inclusion criteria were used: random allocation to treatment, comparison between propofol and any comparator in any clinical setting. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-three studies randomizing 14,516 patients were included. No differences in mortality between patients receiving propofol [349/6957 (5.0%)] vs. any comparator [340/7559 (4.5%)] were observed in the overall population [risk ratio = 1.05, 95% confidence interval (0.93 to 1.18), P = 0.5] and in several sub-analyses. CONCLUSION: Inspite of theoretical concerns, propofol has no detrimental effect on survival according to the largest meta-analysis of randomized trials ever performed on hypnotic drug.

Intraoperative prophylactic and therapeutic non-invasive ventilation: a systematic review.

Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) has been used to prevent or to treat perioperative acute respiratory failure (ARF). Intraoperative prophylactic and therapeutic use of NIV could be of interest to patients with anticipated difficulty in postoperative weaning from mechanical ventilation or to patients refusing tracheal intubation. Intraoperative NIV might also be useful when deep sedation is required, as this can cause respiratory depression. PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library were searched for pertinent studies. Inclusion criteria were NIV use during surgery and adult patients; the exclusion criteria were NIV application only in the preoperative or postoperative periods, paediatric patients, NIV applied as negative pressure ventilation. Thirty papers including 618 patients were included for final analysis. Intraoperative therapeutic NIV to treat ARF was reported for 92 patients and in all those cases, including six Caesarean sections, surgery was completed uneventfully. Intraoperative prophylactic NIV to avoid ARF was described in 24 patients with severe respiratory limitation and in 502 healthy patients during deep sedation. Three patients could not be successfully ventilated due to upper airway obstruction, but no further complication was reported. Intraoperative NIV appears feasible, safe, and potentially useful, particularly when tracheal intubation is best avoided. However, high-quality, randomized studies are required.

Single dilator vs. guide wire dilating forceps tracheostomy: a meta-analysis of randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: Single dilator technique (SDT) and guide wire dilating forceps (GWDF) are the two most commonly used techniques of percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) in critically ill adult patients. We performed a meta-analysis of randomised, controlled trials comparing intraoperative, mid-term and late complications of these two techniques. METHODS: Pertinent studies were searched in BioMedCentral, PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of clinical trials. We selected all randomised studies comparing SDT and GWDF techniques in adult critically ill patients published in a peer-reviewed journal. RESULTS: Among 1040 retrieved studies, five eligible studies randomising 363 patients (181 to GWDF, 182 to SDT) were identified. The incidence of the composite outcome difficult cannula insertion/difficult dilation or failure was higher with the GWDF technique (15.5% vs. 4.9 %, P = 0.02). Moreover, intraprocedural bleeding was more common in the GWDF group (19.3% vs. 7.6% in SDT group, P = 0.018). A trend towards an increased incidence of fracture of tracheal rings was noted in the SDT group (6.5% vs. 0.5% in the GWDF group, P = 0.13). No difference in mid-term or long-term complications was observed. CONCLUSION: GWDF technique is associated with a higher incidence of intraprocedural bleeding and of technical difficulties in completing the procedure (difficult cannula insertions/difficult dilations or failures) compared with the SDT technique. No differences were identified in mid-term and long-term complications. Further studies comparing SDT and GWDF in the general population and in subgroups of high-risk patients (like obese or hypoxaemic patients) are warranted.

Non-invasive ventilation in cardiac surgery: a concise review.

Mild to severe respiratory dysfunction is still a common issue after cardiac surgery. Postoperative respiratory complications are associated with prolonged hospitalization and worse survival. In this high-risk surgery, non-invasive ventilation could have relevant positive effects. The present narrative concise review aims to summarize available data on the role of non-invasive ventilation before and after cardiac surgery. Non-invasive ventilation exerts its main effects on the pulmonary and on the cardiovascular systems.  Non-invasive ventilation can be applied to prevent acute respiratory failure; it can also be prescribed as a curative tool to treat an established postoperative acute respiratory failure. Non-invasive ventilation could also be applied to wean patients from mechanical ventilation. When applied as a preventive tool, the main scope is the prevention of pneumonia by resolving or preventing atelectasis. So far, limited (but encouraging) data are available: its routine use in all patients to prevent postoperative acute respiratory failure cannot be recommended. Non-invasive ventilation to treat postoperative acute respiratory failure has been evaluated more extensively. A failure rate from 10 to 55% was reported. Safety appears preserved, with no relevant hemodynamic complication reported. Non-invasive ventilation has also been applied during percutaneous aortic valve implant in patients unable to lie supine due to severe respiratory limitation and orthopnea. In conclusion, non-invasive ventilation has the potential to be very useful before and after cardiac surgery. So far, results are promising but available data are limited. Training and experience are essential to obtain positive results and to avoid complications.

Anaesthetic drugs and survival: a Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized trials in cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: Many studies have compared desflurane, isoflurane, sevoflurane, total i.v. anaesthesia (TIVA), or all in cardiac surgery to assess their effects on patient survival. METHODS: We performed standard pairwise and Bayesian network meta-analyses; the latter allows indirect assessments if any of the anaesthetic agents were not compared in head-to-head trials. Pertinent studies were identified using BioMedCentral, MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library (last updated in June 2012). RESULTS: We identified 38 randomized trials with survival data published between 1991 and 2012, with most studies (63%) done in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) patients with standard cardiopulmonary bypass. Standard meta-analysis showed that the use of a volatile agent was associated with a reduction in mortality when compared with TIVA at the longest follow-up available [25/1994 (1.3%) in the volatile group vs 43/1648 (2.6%) in the TIVA arm, odds ratio (OR)=0.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.33-0.81, P-value for effect=0.004, number needed to treat 74, I(2)=0%] with results confirmed in trials with low risk of bias, in large trials, and when including only CABG studies. Bayesian network meta-analysis showed that sevoflurane (OR=0.31, 95% credible interval 0.14-0.64) and desflurane (OR=0.43, 95% credible interval 0.21-0.82) were individually associated with a reduction in mortality when compared with TIVA. CONCLUSIONS: Anaesthesia with volatile agents appears to reduce mortality after cardiac surgery when compared with TIVA, especially when sevoflurane or desflurane is used. A large, multicentre trial is warranted to confirm that long-term survival is significantly affected by the choice of anaesthetic.

Non-invasive ventilation during upper endoscopies in adult patients. A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Upper endoscopies (UE) are widely performed. Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) during UE has been used to avoid respiratory complications, mainly in high-risk or sedated patients. We performed a systematic review on this topic. METHODS: BioMedCentral, PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials were searched (updated September 1, 2012). Further searches involved conference proceedings. RESULTS: We included in this systematic review 27 papers out of 405 publications retrieved. Ten studies reported the use without complications of NIV to assist fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB) and broncho-alveolar lavage (BAL). Ten studies described the use of NIV in fiberoptic-guided tracheal intubations. The authors reported no complications, even in hypoxemic patients and they observed only one failure (0.4%). Three studies evaluated the effectiveness of NIV during placement of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in patients with neuromuscular diseases. In this group the failure rate was 4.4%. One study described the successful use of NIV in sedated patients undergoing gastroscopy. Three studies reported the successful application of NIV during trans-esophageal echocardiography. Overall, the procedure could not be performed due to inability of NIV to maintain safe intra-procedural ventilation in four out of total 515 cases of NIV-aided UE, suggesting a success rate higher than 99.2%. CONCLUSION: This is the first systematic review addressing the use of NIV during upper endoscopies. Its use seems feasible, and based on the limited data available NIV appears safe and likely effective. The patients who would benefit the most are: high-risk and patients undergoing sedation.

Percutaneous tracheostomy, a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) is a common procedure in intensive care units and the identification of the best technique is very important. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized studies comparing different PDT techniques in critically ill adult patients to investigate if one technique is superior to the others with regard to major and minor intraprocedural complications. METHODS: BioMedCentral and other database of clinical trials were searched for pertinent studies. Inclusion criterion was random allocation to at least two PDT techniques. Exclusion criteria were duplicate publications, nonadult studies, and absence of outcome data. STUDY DESIGN: Population, clinical setting, and complications were extracted. RESULTS: Data from 1130 patients in 13 randomized trials were analyzed. Multiple dilators, single-step dilatation, guide wire dilating forceps, rotational dilation, retrograde tracheostomy, and balloon dilation techniques were always performed in the intensive care unit. The different techniques and devices appeared largely equivalent, with the exception of retrograde tracheostomy, which was associated with more severe complications and more frequent need of conversion to other techniques when compared with guide wire dilating forceps and single-step dilatation techniques. Single-step dilatation technique was associated with fewer failures than rotational dilation, and fewer mild complications in comparison with balloon dilation and guide wire dilating forceps (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Among the six analyzed techniques, single-step dilatation technique appeared the most reliable in terms of safety and success rate. However, the number of available randomized trials was insufficient to confidently assess the best PDT technique.

Non-invasive ventilation outside of the Intensive Care Unit: an Italian survey.

BACKGROUND: Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) is increasingly utilized for patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF). The shortage of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) beds, a growing confidence with the technique, and the opportunity to treat ARF in a more responsive phase lead to the application of NIV outside of the ICU. The Study Group on Emergency of the Italian Society of Anesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation and Intensive Care (SIAARTI) promoted a national survey to collect data on NIV use outside of the ICU. METHODS: An anonymous questionnaire was developed, focusing on the location and modalities of NIV treatments, organizational and technical aspects, monitoring, estimated outcomes, the presence of protocols, and complications. The questionnaire was mailed to all members of the Scientific Society. RESULTS: Forty-six respondents were from 46 hospitals. Thirty-seven (80%) respondents applied NIV in the Emergency Department and/or General Wards. In the majority of hospitals (72%), training preceded NIV introduction. NIV could be applied in all ordinary wards in 28% of the hospitals. Patients remained in their ward in 89% of the hospitals, and a protocol was present in 70% of the hospitals. Monitoring was usually limited to continuous pulse-oxymetry and EKG; 18% of respondents did not have a monitoring standard. Reported complications and practical problems were potentially severe. Few hospitals (15%) collected data on NIV treatments. The efficacy of NIV was perceived as low, as 73% of respondents estimated that NIV avoided tracheal intubation in less than half of the treated patients. CONCLUSION: In Italy, NIV is extensively applied in non-intensive wards, and its use is not free from criticalities and contradictions. Further prospective studies and possibly guidelines are needed.