Expert Perspectives on ECCO2R for Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure : Consensus of a 2022 European Roundtable Meeting

Background By controlling hypercapnia, respiratory acidosis, and associated consequences, extracorporeal CO$_{2}$ removal (ECCO$_{2}$R) has the potential to facilitate ultra-protective lung ventilation (UPLV) strategies and to decrease injury from mechanical ventilation. We convened a meeting of European intensivists and nephrologists and used a modified Delphi process to provide updated insights into the role of ECCO$_{2}$R in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and to identify recommendations for a future randomized controlled trial. Results The group agreed that lung protective ventilation and UPLV should have distinct definitions, with UPLV primarily defined by a tidal volume (V$_{T}$) of 4–6 mL/kg predicted body weight with a driving pressure (ΔP) ≤ 14–15 cmH$_{2}$O. Fourteen (93%) participants agreed that ECCO$_{2}$R would be needed in the majority of patients to implement UPLV. Furthermore, 10 participants (majority, 63%) would select patients with PaO$_{2}$:FiO$_{2}$ > 100 mmHg (> 13.3 kPa) and 14 (consensus, 88%) would select patients with a ventilatory ratio of > 2.5–3. A minimum CO$_{2}$ removal rate of 80 mL/min delivered by continuous renal support machines was suggested (11/14 participants, 79%) for this objective, using a short, double-lumen catheter inserted into the right internal jugular vein as the preferred vascular access. Of the participants, 14/15 (93%, consensus) stated that a new randomized trial of ECCO$_{2}$R is needed in patients with ARDS. A ΔP of ≥ 14–15 cmH$_{2}$O was suggested by 12/14 participants (86%) as the primary inclusion criterion. Conclusions ECCO$_{2}$R may facilitate UPLV with lower volume and pressures provided by the ventilator, while controlling respiratory acidosis. Since recent European Society of Intensive Care Medicine guidelines on ARDS recommended against the use of ECCO$_{2}$R for the treatment of ARDS outside of randomized controlled trials, new trials of ECCO$_{2}$R are urgently needed, with a ΔP of ≥ 14–15 cmH$_{2}$O suggested as the primary inclusion criterion

Hyperoxemia and excess oxygen use in early acute respiratory distress syndrome: insights from the LUNG SAFE study

Contains fulltext : 218568.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Concerns exist regarding the prevalence and impact of unnecessary oxygen use in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We examined this issue in patients with ARDS enrolled in the Large observational study to UNderstand the Global impact of Severe Acute respiratory FailurE (LUNG SAFE) study. METHODS: In this secondary analysis of the LUNG SAFE study, we wished to determine the prevalence and the outcomes associated with hyperoxemia on day 1, sustained hyperoxemia, and excessive oxygen use in patients with early ARDS. Patients who fulfilled criteria of ARDS on day 1 and day 2 of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure were categorized based on the presence of hyperoxemia (PaO2 > 100 mmHg) on day 1, sustained (i.e., present on day 1 and day 2) hyperoxemia, or excessive oxygen use (FIO2 >/= 0.60 during hyperoxemia). RESULTS: Of 2005 patients that met the inclusion criteria, 131 (6.5%) were hypoxemic (PaO2 < 55 mmHg), 607 (30%) had hyperoxemia on day 1, and 250 (12%) had sustained hyperoxemia. Excess FIO2 use occurred in 400 (66%) out of 607 patients with hyperoxemia. Excess FIO2 use decreased from day 1 to day 2 of ARDS, with most hyperoxemic patients on day 2 receiving relatively low FIO2. Multivariate analyses found no independent relationship between day 1 hyperoxemia, sustained hyperoxemia, or excess FIO2 use and adverse clinical outcomes. Mortality was 42% in patients with excess FIO2 use, compared to 39% in a propensity-matched sample of normoxemic (PaO2 55-100 mmHg) patients (P = 0.47). CONCLUSIONS: Hyperoxemia and excess oxygen use are both prevalent in early ARDS but are most often non-sustained. No relationship was found between hyperoxemia or excessive oxygen use and patient outcome in this cohort. TRIAL REGISTRATION: LUNG-SAFE is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02010073

Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

Funder: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013347Funder: Flemish Society for Critical Care NursesAbstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat

Correction to: Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake