-
Critical Care Medicine May 2022
Topics: COVID-19; Humans; Patient Positioning; Prone Position; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 35120038
DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000005486 -
Chest Mar 2023Prone position ventilation (PPV) is resource-intensive, yet the optimal strategy for PPV in intubated patients with COVID-19 is unclear.
BACKGROUND
Prone position ventilation (PPV) is resource-intensive, yet the optimal strategy for PPV in intubated patients with COVID-19 is unclear.
RESEARCH QUESTION
Does a prolonged (24 or more h) PPV strategy improve mortality in intubated COVID-19 patients compared with intermittent (∼16 h with daily supination) PPV?
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS
Multicenter, retrospective cohort study of consecutively admitted intubated COVID-19 patients treated with PPV between March 11 and May 31, 2020. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included 90-day all-cause mortality and prone-related complications. Inverse probability treatment weights (IPTW) were used to control for potential treatment selection bias.
RESULTS
Of the COVID-19 patients who received PPV, 157 underwent prolonged and 110 underwent intermittent PPV. Patients undergoing prolonged PPV had reduced 30-day (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.475; 95% CI, 0.336-0.670; P < .001) and 90-day (aHR, 0.638; 95% CI, 0.461-0.883; P = .006) mortality compared with intermittent PPV. In patients with Pao/Fio ≤ 150 at the time of pronation, prolonged PPV was associated with reduced 30-day (aHR, 0.357; 95% CI, 0.213-0.597; P < .001) and 90-day mortality (aHR, 0.562; 95% CI, 0.357-0.884; P = .008). Patients treated with prolonged PPV underwent fewer pronation and supination events (median, 1; 95% CI, 1-2 vs 3; 95% CI, 1-4; P < .001). PPV strategy was not associated with overall PPV-related complications, although patients receiving prolonged PPV had increased rates of facial edema and lower rates of peri-proning hypotension.
INTERPRETATION
Among intubated COVID-19 patients who received PPV, prolonged PPV was associated with reduced mortality. Prolonged PPV was associated with fewer pronation and supination events and a small increase in rates of facial edema. These findings suggest that prolonged PPV is a safe, effective strategy for mortality reduction in intubated COVID-19 patients.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Retrospective Studies; Prone Position; Respiration, Artificial; Edema
PubMed: 36343687
DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2022.10.034 -
Journal of Clinical Anesthesia Nov 2021To review the effects of prone position and supine position on oxygenation parameters in patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
STUDY OBJECTIVE
To review the effects of prone position and supine position on oxygenation parameters in patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis of non-randomized trials.
PATIENTS
Databases of EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL were systematically searched from its inception until March 2021.
INTERVENTIONS
COVID-19 patients being positioned in the prone position either whilst awake or mechanically ventilated.
MEASUREMENTS
Primary outcomes were oxygenation parameters (PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio, PaCO₂, SpO₂). Secondary outcomes included the rate of intubation and mortality rate.
RESULTS
Thirty-five studies (n = 1712 patients) were included in this review. In comparison to the supine group, prone position significantly improved the PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio (study = 13, patients = 1002, Mean difference, MD 52.15, 95% CI 37.08 to 67.22; p < 0.00001) and SpO₂ (study = 11, patients = 998, MD 4.17, 95% CI 2.53 to 5.81; p ≤0.00001). Patients received prone position were associated with lower incidence of mortality (study = 5, patients = 688, Odd ratio, OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.80; p = 0.007). No significant difference was noted in the incidence of intubation rate (study = 5, patients = 626, OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.86; p = 0.42) between the supine and prone groups.
CONCLUSION
Our meta-analysis demonstrated that prone position improved PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio with better SpO₂ than supine position in COVID-19 patients. Given the limited number of studies with small sample size and substantial heterogeneity of measured outcomes, further studies are warranted to standardize the regime of prone position to improve the certainty of evidence. PROSPERO Registration: CRD42021234050.
Topics: COVID-19; Humans; Prone Position; Respiration, Artificial; SARS-CoV-2; Supine Position
PubMed: 34182261
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2021.110406 -
American Journal of Respiratory and... Jun 2021
Topics: Humans; Patient Positioning; Prone Position
PubMed: 33556302
DOI: 10.1164/rccm.202101-0156ED -
Annals of Cardiac Anaesthesia 2016Mechanical ventilation remains the cornerstone in the management of severe acute respiratory failure. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is the most common cause... (Review)
Review
Mechanical ventilation remains the cornerstone in the management of severe acute respiratory failure. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is the most common cause of respiratory failure. It is associated with substantial mortality, and unmanageable refractory hypoxemia remains the most feared clinical possibility. If hypoxemia persists despite application of lung protective ventilation, additional therapies including inhaled vasodilators, prone positioning, recruitment maneuvers, high-frequency oscillatory ventilation, neuromuscular blockade (NMB), and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation may be needed. NMB and prone ventilation are modalities that have been clearly linked to reduced mortality in ARDS. Rescue therapies pose a clinical challenge requiring a precarious balance of risks and benefits, as well as, in-depth knowledge of therapeutic limitations.
Topics: Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation; Humans; Hypoxia; Prone Position; Respiration, Artificial; Respiratory Distress Syndrome
PubMed: 26750680
DOI: 10.4103/0971-9784.173030 -
CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association... Feb 2021
Review
Topics: COVID-19; Contraindications, Procedure; Humans; Oxygen Inhalation Therapy; Prone Position; Respiration, Artificial; Respiratory Distress Syndrome; Respiratory Insufficiency; Respiratory Physiological Phenomena
PubMed: 33526550
DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.201201-f -
Journal of Critical Care Dec 2023Awake prone positioning (APP) of non-intubated patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure (AHRF) has been inconsistently adopted into routine care of patients... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Awake prone positioning (APP) of non-intubated patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure (AHRF) has been inconsistently adopted into routine care of patients with COVID-19, likely due to apparent conflicting evidence from recent trials. This short guideline aims to provide evidence-based recommendations for the use of APP in various clinical scenarios.
METHODS
An international multidisciplinary panel, assembled for their expertise and representativeness, and supported by a methodologist, performed a systematic literature search, summarized the available evidence derived from randomized clinical trials, and developed recommendations using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) methodology.
RESULTS
The panel strongly recommends that APP rather than standard supine care be used in patients with COVID-19 receiving advanced respiratory support (high-flow nasal cannula, continuous positive airway pressure or non-invasive ventilation). Due to lack of evidence from randomized controlled trials, the panel provides no recommendation on the use of APP in patients with COVID-19 supported with conventional oxygen therapy, nor in patients with AHRF due to causes other than COVID-19.
CONCLUSION
APP should be routinely implemented in patients with COVID-19 receiving advanced respiratory support.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Prone Position; Wakefulness; Oxygen; Respiratory Insufficiency
PubMed: 37639921
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2023.154401 -
Pneumologie (Stuttgart, Germany) Feb 2020
Topics: Humans; Lung; Patient Positioning; Prone Position; Respiration
PubMed: 32050281
DOI: 10.1055/a-0978-0893 -
Critical Care (London, England) Aug 2023The effects of awake prone position on the breathing pattern of hypoxemic patients need to be better understood. We conducted a crossover trial to assess the... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
The effects of awake prone position on the breathing pattern of hypoxemic patients need to be better understood. We conducted a crossover trial to assess the physiological effects of awake prone position in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.
METHODS
Fifteen patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and PaO/FiO < 200 mmHg underwent high-flow nasal oxygen for 1 h in supine position and 2 h in prone position, followed by a final 1-h supine phase. At the end of each study phase, the following parameters were measured: arterial blood gases, inspiratory effort (ΔP), transpulmonary driving pressure (ΔP), respiratory rate and esophageal pressure simplified pressure-time product per minute (sPTP) by esophageal manometry, tidal volume (V), end-expiratory lung impedance (EELI), lung compliance, airway resistance, time constant, dynamic strain (V/EELI) and pendelluft extent through electrical impedance tomography.
RESULTS
Compared to supine position, prone position increased PaO/FiO (median [Interquartile range] 104 mmHg [76-129] vs. 74 [69-93], p < 0.001), reduced respiratory rate (24 breaths/min [22-26] vs. 27 [26-30], p = 0.05) and increased ΔP (12 cmHO [11-13] vs. 9 [8-12], p = 0.04) with similar sPTP (131 [75-154] cmHO s min vs. 105 [81-129], p > 0.99) and ΔP (9 [7-11] cmHO vs. 8 [5-9], p = 0.17). Airway resistance and time constant were higher in prone vs. supine position (9 cmHO s arbitrary units [4-11] vs. 6 [4-9], p = 0.05; 0.53 s [0.32-61] vs. 0.40 [0.37-0.44], p = 0.03). Prone position increased EELI (3887 arbitrary units [3414-8547] vs. 1456 [959-2420], p = 0.002) and promoted V distribution towards dorsal lung regions without affecting V size and lung compliance: this generated lower dynamic strain (0.21 [0.16-0.24] vs. 0.38 [0.30-0.49], p = 0.004). The magnitude of pendelluft phenomenon was not different between study phases (55% [7-57] of V in prone vs. 31% [14-55] in supine position, p > 0.99).
CONCLUSIONS
Prone position improves oxygenation, increases EELI and promotes V distribution towards dependent lung regions without affecting V size, ΔP, lung compliance and pendelluft magnitude. Prone position reduces respiratory rate and increases ΔP because of positional increases in airway resistance and prolonged expiratory time. Because high ΔP is the main mechanistic determinant of self-inflicted lung injury, caution may be needed in using awake prone position in patients exhibiting intense ΔP. Clinical trail registeration: The study was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03095300) on March 29, 2017.
Topics: Humans; Prone Position; Respiration; Respiratory Insufficiency; Tidal Volume; Wakefulness; Cross-Over Studies
PubMed: 37592288
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-023-04600-9 -
European Respiratory Review : An... Jun 2023Awake prone positioning (APP) of patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure gained considerable attention during the early phases of the coronavirus disease 2019... (Review)
Review
Awake prone positioning (APP) of patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure gained considerable attention during the early phases of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Prior to the pandemic, reports of APP were limited to case series in patients with influenza and in immunocompromised patients, with encouraging results in terms of tolerance and oxygenation improvement. Prone positioning of awake patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure appears to result in many of the same physiological changes improving oxygenation seen in invasively ventilated patients with moderate-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. A number of randomised controlled studies published on patients with varying severity of COVID-19 have reported apparently contrasting outcomes. However, there is consistent evidence that more hypoxaemic patients requiring advanced respiratory support, who are managed in higher care environments and who can be prone for several hours, benefit most from APP use. We review the physiological basis by which prone positioning results in changes in lung mechanics and gas exchange and summarise the latest evidence base for APP primarily in COVID-19. We examine the key factors that influence the success of APP, the optimal target populations for APP and the key unknowns that will shape future research.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Wakefulness; Prone Position; Respiratory Insufficiency; Lung; Respiratory Distress Syndrome; Patient Positioning
PubMed: 37137508
DOI: 10.1183/16000617.0245-2022