-
JAMA Network Open Jul 2019A number of interventions are available to manage patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, the associations of currently... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Assessment of Therapeutic Interventions and Lung Protective Ventilation in Patients With Moderate to Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.
IMPORTANCE
A number of interventions are available to manage patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, the associations of currently available ventilatory strategies and adjunctive therapies with mortality are uncertain.
OBJECTIVES
To compare and rank different therapeutic strategies to identify the best intervention associated with a reduction in mortality in adult patients with moderate to severe ARDS.
DATA SOURCES
An electronic search of MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process/ePubs Ahead of Print, Embase, Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trial Register (Central), PubMed, and CINAHL was conducted, from database inception to May 29, 2019.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized clinical trials of interventions for adults with moderate to severe ARDS that used lung protective ventilation. No language restrictions were applied.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Data were independently extracted by 2 reviewers and synthesized with Bayesian random-effects network meta-analyses.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Barotrauma was a secondary outcome.
RESULTS
Among 25 randomized clinical trials evaluating 9 interventions, 2686 of 7743 patients (34.6%) died within 28 days. Compared with lung protective ventilation alone, prone positioning and venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation were associated with significantly lower 28-day mortality (prone positioning: risk ratio, 0.69; 95% credible interval, 0.48-0.99; low quality of evidence; venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: risk ratio, 0.60; 95% credible interval, 0.38-0.93; moderate quality of evidence). These 2 interventions had the highest ranking probabilities, although they were not significantly different from each other. Among 18 trials reporting on barotrauma, 448 of 6258 patients (7.2%) experienced this secondary outcome. No intervention was superior to any other in reducing barotrauma, and each represented low to very low quality of evidence.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
This network meta-analysis supports the use of prone positioning and venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in addition to lung protective ventilation in patients with ARDS. Moreover, venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation may be considered as an early strategy for adults with severe ARDS receiving lung protective ventilation.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Bayes Theorem; Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Network Meta-Analysis; Patient Positioning; Respiration, Artificial; Respiratory Distress Syndrome
PubMed: 31365111
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.8116 -
Therapeutic Advances in Respiratory... 2019Setting a positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) on patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) receiving mechanical ventilation has been an issue of great... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
Effect of lung recruitment and titrated positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) low PEEP on patients with moderate-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
Setting a positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) on patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) receiving mechanical ventilation has been an issue of great contention. Therefore, we aimed to determine effects of lung recruitment maneuver (RM) and titrated PEEP low PEEP on adult patients with moderate-severe ARDS.
METHODS
Data sources and study selection proceeded as follows: PubMed, Ovid, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from 2003 to May 2018. Original clinical randomized controlled trials which met the eligibility criteria were included. To compare the prognosis between the titrated PEEP and low PEEP groups on patients with moderate-severe ARDS (PaO/FiO < 200 mmHg). Heterogeneity was quantified through the statistic. Egger's test and funnel plots were used to assess publication bias.
RESULTS
No difference was found in 28-day mortality and ICU mortality (OR = 0.97, 95% CI (0.61-1.52), = 0.88; OR = 1.14, 95% CI (0.91-1.43), = 0.26, respectively). Only ventilator-free days, length of stay in the ICU, length of stay in hospital, and incidence of barotrauma could be systematically reviewed owing to bias and extensive heterogeneity.
CONCLUSION
No difference was observed in the RM between the titrated PEEP and the low PEEP in 28-day mortality and ICU mortality on patients with moderate-severe ARDS.
Topics: Adult; Hospitalization; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Positive-Pressure Respiration; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiratory Distress Syndrome; Severity of Illness Index; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31269867
DOI: 10.1177/1753466619858228 -
Heart & Lung : the Journal of Critical... 2021Pneumothorax has been frequently described as a complication of COVID-19 infections.
BACKGROUND
Pneumothorax has been frequently described as a complication of COVID-19 infections.
OBJECTIVE
In this systematic review, we describe the incidence, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of COVID-19-related pneumothorax.
METHODS
Studies were identified through MEDLINE, Pubmed, and Google Scholar databases using keywords of "COVID-19," "SARS-CoV-2," "pneumothorax," "pneumomediastinum," and "barotrauma" from January 1st, 2020 to January 30th, 2021.
RESULTS
Among the nine observational studies, the incidence of pneumothorax is low at 0.3% in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. However, the incidence of pneumothorax increases to 12.8-23.8% in those requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) with a high mortality rate up to 100%. COVID-19-related pneumothorax tends to be unilateral and right-sided. Age, pre-existing lung diseases, and active smoking status are not shown to be risk factors. The time to pneumothorax diagnosis is around 9.0-19.6 days from admission and 5.4 days after IMV initiation. COVID-19-related pneumothoraces are associated with prolonged hospitalization, increased likelihood of ICU admission and death, especially among the elderly.
CONCLUSION
COVID-19-related pneumothorax likely signify greater disease severity. With the high variability of COVID-19-related pneumothorax incidence described, a well-designed study is required to better assess the significance of COVID-19-related pneumothorax.
Topics: Aged; COVID-19; Humans; Incidence; Mediastinal Emphysema; Pneumothorax; Respiration, Artificial; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 34087677
DOI: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2021.04.005 -
Critical Care Medicine Mar 2022There are concerns of a high barotrauma rate in coronavirus disease 2019 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome receiving invasive mechanical ventilation.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
There are concerns of a high barotrauma rate in coronavirus disease 2019 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome receiving invasive mechanical ventilation. However, a few studies were published, and reported rates were highly variable. We performed a systematic literature review to identify rates of barotrauma, pneumothorax, and pneumomediastinum in coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation.
DATA SOURCE
PubMed and Scopus were searched for studies reporting barotrauma event rate in adult coronavirus disease 2019 patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation.
STUDY SELECTION
We included all studies investigating adult patients with coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome requiring mechanical ventilation. Case reports, studies performed outside ICU setting, and pediatric studies were excluded. Two investigators independently screened and selected studies for inclusion.
DATA EXTRACTION
Two investigators abstracted data on study characteristics, rate of pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum and overall barotrauma events, and mortality. When available, data from noncoronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients were also collected. Pooled estimates for barotrauma, pneumothorax, and pneumomediastinum were calculated.
DATA SYNTHESIS
A total of 13 studies with 1,814 invasively ventilated coronavirus disease 2019 patients and 493 noncoronavirus disease 2019 patients were included. A total of 266/1,814 patients (14.7%) had at least one barotrauma event (pooled estimates, 16.1% [95% CI, 11.8-20.4%]). Pneumothorax occurred in 132/1,435 patients (pooled estimates, 10.7%; 95% CI, 6.7-14.7%), whereas pneumomediastinum occurred in 162/1,432 patients (pooled estimates, 11.2%; 95% CI, 8.0-14.3%). Mortality in coronavirus disease 2019 patients who developed barotrauma was 111/198 patients (pooled estimates, 61.6%; 95% CI, 50.2-73.0%). In noncoronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients, barotrauma occurred in 31/493 patients (6.3%; pooled estimates, 5.7%; 95% CI, -2.1% to 13.5%).
CONCLUSIONS
Barotrauma occurs in one out of six coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation and is associated with a mortality rate of about 60%. Barotrauma rate may be higher than noncoronavirus disease 2019 controls.
Topics: Barotrauma; COVID-19; Humans; Mediastinal Emphysema; Pneumothorax; Respiration, Artificial; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 34637421
DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000005283 -
Journal of Special Operations Medicine... 2020There is growing concern that military breaching and training and firing artillery and mortars, grenades, and shoulder-fired weapons may have some type of cumulative...
There is growing concern that military breaching and training and firing artillery and mortars, grenades, and shoulder-fired weapons may have some type of cumulative deleterious effects. There are anecdotal reports of those with repetitive exposure to low-level blast complaining of various symptoms, as well as increasing empirical evidence. The purpose of this report is to provide a systematic review of the literature on repetitive lowlevel blast as it pertains to military and police training protocols. An extensive literature search was conducted, resulting in detailed review of 18 studies. Results suggest few consistent findings, likely due to the heterogeneity of methods, high risk of bias, and lack of reliance on objective blast-exposure data. Adverse effects, when present, dissipated over time. All studies that used blast gauges found significant associations, though only a subset actually reported using the blast-gauge data (to correlate objective exposure with outcomes). When comparing studies within an outcome domain (e.g., cognitive), findings were largely inconsistent. Research with larger sample sizes, followed longitudinally, is needed.
Topics: Blast Injuries; Explosions; Humans; Military Personnel; Police
PubMed: 32203612
DOI: 10.55460/3AC6-AX9I -
Journal of Critical Care Feb 2022To evaluate the effects of high and low levels of PEEP on ICU patients without ARDS. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To evaluate the effects of high and low levels of PEEP on ICU patients without ARDS.
METHODS
We searched public databases (including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Clinicaltrial.gov). The Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment tool was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies.
RESULTS
We included 2307 patients from 24 trials. Although no significant difference was found between high and low PEEP applications in in-hospital mortality (risk ratio[RR] 0.98, 95% confidence interval[CI] [0.81, 1.19], P = 0.87), high PEEP indeed decreased the incidence of ARDS, hypoxemia, and increased the level of PaO/FIO. In addition, although the overall results did not reveal any advantages of high PEEP in terms of secondary outcomes regarding 28-day mortality, the duration of ventilation, atelectasis, pulmonary barotrauma, hypotension, and so forth, the subgroup analysis concerning the level of low PEEP (ZEEP or not) and patient type (postoperative or medical ones) yielded different results. The TSA results suggested that more RCTs are needed.
CONCLUSIONS
Although ventilation with high PEEP in ICU patients without ARDS may not reduce in-hospital mortality, the decreased incidences of ARDS and hypoxemia and the improvement in PaO/FIO were found in the high PEEP arm.
Topics: Hospital Mortality; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Positive-Pressure Respiration; Respiration, Artificial; Respiratory Distress Syndrome
PubMed: 34689064
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2021.09.026 -
BMJ Military Health Aug 2020Fractures have been a common denominator of the injury patterns observed over the past century of warfare. The fractures typified by the blast and ballistic injuries of...
INTRODUCTION
Fractures have been a common denominator of the injury patterns observed over the past century of warfare. The fractures typified by the blast and ballistic injuries of war lead to high rates of bone loss, soft tissue injury and infection, greatly increasing the likelihood of non-union. Despite this, no reliable treatment strategy for non-union exists. This literature review aims to explore the rates of non-union across a century of conflict, in order to determine whether our ability to heal the fractures of war has improved.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was conducted, evaluating the rates of union in fractures sustained in a combat environment over a 100-year period. Only those fractures sustained through a ballistic or blast mechanism were included. The review was in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Quality and bias assessment was also undertaken.
RESULTS
Thirty studies met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 3232 fractures described across 15 different conflicts from the period 1919-2019. Male subjects made up 96% of cases, and tibial fractures predominated (39%). The lowest fracture union rate observed in a series was 50%. Linear regression analysis demonstrated that increasing years had no statistically significant impact on union rate.
CONCLUSIONS
Failure to improve fracture union rates is likely a result of numerous factors, including greater use of blast weaponry and better survivability of casualties. Finding novel strategies to promote fracture healing is a key defence research priority in order to improve the rates of fractures sustained in a combat environment.
Topics: Blast Injuries; Fracture Healing; Fractures, Bone; Humans; Warfare; Wounds, Gunshot
PubMed: 32217686
DOI: 10.1136/bmjmilitary-2019-001375 -
Tuberkuloz Ve Toraks Jun 2022The first application of modern non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV) can be traced back to over 30 years ago when a patient suffering from Duchenne Muscular...
The first application of modern non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV) can be traced back to over 30 years ago when a patient suffering from Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy was successfully ventilated. Since then, the use of NIV has been on the rise throughout the world. Although a very modern and safe therapy, complications during its application are inevitable. In addition to some well-known complications, others have described more rare entities. In this article, we described such rare complications as pneumoperitoneum, pneumocephalus, parotitis, gastric perforation, and barotrauma. The purpose of this review was to describe unusual complications of NIV, their prevalence, and the mechanisms by which such complications arise. We performed a clinical review by searching PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane libraries with Mesh terms: 'non-invasive mechanical ventilation', 'high-flow nasal cannula', 'rare complication', 'unusual complication', and 'unexpected complication'. These terms were cross-referenced with other keywords: 'pneumoperitoneum', 'parotitis', 'pneumocephalus', 'gastric insufflation', and 'barotrauma'. We included 26 research papers. When applying mechanical ventilation, it is necessary to have a strong knowledge of the mechanics of the device as well as familiarity with the complications that may occur during its use, including less common ones. Prompt and effective treatment of such complications is required, as well as careful consideration of the potential causes of such events, during the application of NIV or HFNC.
Topics: Cannula; Humans; Noninvasive Ventilation; Oxygen Inhalation Therapy; Respiration, Artificial; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35785884
DOI: 10.5578/tt.20229810 -
Journal of Intensive Care 2018Clinical benefits of recruitment maneuver in ARDS patients are controversial. A number of previous studies showed possible benefits; a large recent study reported that...
Recruitment maneuver does not provide any mortality benefit over lung protective strategy ventilation in adult patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a meta-analysis and systematic review of the randomized controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
Clinical benefits of recruitment maneuver in ARDS patients are controversial. A number of previous studies showed possible benefits; a large recent study reported that recruitment maneuver and PEEP titration may even be harmful. This meta-analysis was designed to compare the clinical utility of recruitment maneuver with low tidal volume ventilation in adult patients with ARDS.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials comparing recruitment maneuver and lung protective ventilation strategy with lung protective strategy ventilation protocol alone in adult patients with ARDS has been included in this meta-analysis. PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to 10 November 2017 to identify potentially eligible trials. Pooled risk ratio (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) were calculated for binary and continuous variables respectively.
RESULTS
Data of 2480 patients from 7 randomized controlled trials have been included in this meta-analysis and systemic review. Reported mortality at the longest available follow-up [RR (95% CI) 0.93 (0.80, 1.08); = 0.33], ICU mortality [RR (95% CI) 0.91 (0.76, 1.10); = 0.33] and in-hospital mortality [RR (95% CI) 0.95 (0.83, 1.08); = 0.45] were similar between recruitment maneuver group and standard lung protective ventilation group. Duration of hospital stay [SMD (95% CI) 0.00 (- 0.09, 0.10); = 0.92] and duration of ICU stays [SMD (95% CI) 0.05 (- 0.09, 0.19); = 0.49] were also similar between recruitment maneuver group and standard lung protective ventilation group. Risk of barotrauma was also similar.
CONCLUSION
Use of recruitment maneuver along with co-interventions such as PEEP titration does not provide any benefit in terms of mortality, length of ICU, and hospital stay in ARDS patients.
PubMed: 29983985
DOI: 10.1186/s40560-018-0305-9 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2015During the last decade, there has been a trend towards decreasing tidal volumes for positive pressure ventilation during surgery. It is not known whether this new trend... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Intraoperative use of low volume ventilation to decrease postoperative mortality, mechanical ventilation, lengths of stay and lung injury in patients without acute lung injury.
BACKGROUND
During the last decade, there has been a trend towards decreasing tidal volumes for positive pressure ventilation during surgery. It is not known whether this new trend is beneficial or harmful for patients.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefit of intraoperative use of low tidal volume ventilation (< 10 mL/kg of predicted body weight) to decrease postoperative complications.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2014, Issue 9), MEDLINE (OvidSP) (from 1946 to 5 September 2014) and EMBASE (OvidSP) (from 1974 to 5 September 2014).
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all parallel randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effect of low tidal volumes (defined as < 10 mL/kg) on any of our selected outcomes in adult participants undergoing any type of surgery. We did not retain studies with participants requiring one-lung ventilation.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently assessed the quality of the retained studies with the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. We analysed data with both fixed-effect (I(2) statistic < 25%) or random-effects (I(2) statistic > 25%) models based on the degree of heterogeneity. When there was an effect, we calculated a number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) using the odds ratio. When there was no effect, we calculated the optimal size information.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 12 studies in the review. In total these studies detailed 1012 participants (499 participants in the low tidal volume group and 513 in the high volume group). All studies included were at risk of bias as defined by the Cochrane tool. Based on nine studies including 899 participants, we found no difference in 0- to 30-day mortality between low and high tidal volume groups (risk ratio (RR) 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 1.54; I(2) statistic 0%; low quality evidence). Based on four studies including 601 participants undergoing abdominal or spinal surgery, we found a lower incidence of postoperative pneumonia in the lower tidal volume group (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.99; I(2) statistic 19%; moderate quality evidence; NNTB 19, 95% CI 14 to 169). Based on two studies including 428 participants, low tidal volumes decreased the need for non-invasive postoperative ventilatory support (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.64; moderate quality evidence; NNTB 11, 95% CI 9 to 19). Based on eight studies including 814 participants, low tidal volumes during surgery decreased the need for postoperative invasive ventilatory support (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.80; I(2) statistic 0%; NNTB 36, 95% CI 27 to 202; moderate quality evidence). Based on three studies including 650 participants, we found no difference in the intensive care unit length of stay (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.01, 95% CI -0.22 to 0.20; I(2) statistic = 42%; moderate quality evidence). Based on eight studies including 846 participants, we did not find a difference in hospital length of stay (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.07; I(2) statistic 52%; moderate quality evidence). A meta-regression showed that the effect size increased proportionally to the peak pressure measured at the end of surgery in the high volume group. We did not find a difference in the risk of pneumothorax (RR 2.01, 95% CI 0.51 to 7.95; I(2) statistic 0%; low quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Low tidal volumes (defined as < 10 mL/kg) should be used preferentially during surgery. They decrease the need for postoperative ventilatory support (invasive and non-invasive). Further research is required to determine the maximum peak pressure of ventilation that should be allowed during surgery.
Topics: Acute Lung Injury; Adult; Aged; Barotrauma; Body Weight; Female; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Insufflation; Intensive Care Units; Intraoperative Care; Length of Stay; Male; Middle Aged; Noninvasive Ventilation; Pneumonia; Positive-Pressure Respiration; Postoperative Care; Pulmonary Atelectasis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tidal Volume
PubMed: 26641378
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011151.pub2