Patient-Self Inflicted Lung Injury: A Practical Review

Patients with severe lung injury usually have a high respiratory drive, resulting in intense inspiratory effort that may even worsen lung damage by several mechanisms gathered under the name “patient-self inflicted lung injury” (P-SILI). Even though no clinical study has yet demonstrated that a ventilatory strategy to limit the risk of P-SILI can improve the outcome, the concept of P-SILI relies on sound physiological reasoning, an accumulation of clinical observations and some consistent experimental data. In this review, we detail the main pathophysiological mechanisms by which the patient’s respiratory effort could become deleterious: excessive transpulmonary pressure resulting in over-distension; inhomogeneous distribution of transpulmonary pressure variations across the lung leading to cyclic opening/closing of nondependent regions and pendelluft phenomenon; increase in the transvascular pressure favoring the aggravation of pulmonary edema. We also describe potentially harmful patient-ventilator interactions. Finally, we discuss in a practical way how to detect in the clinical setting situations at risk for P-SILI and to what extent this recognition can help personalize the treatment strategy

Lung aeration estimated by chest electrical impedance tomography and lung ultrasound during extubation

Abstract Background This study hypothesized that patients with extubation failure exhibit a loss of lung aeration and heterogeneity in air distribution, which could be monitored by chest EIT and lung ultrasound. Patients at risk of extubation failure were included after a successful spontaneous breathing trial. Lung ultrasound [with calculation of lung ultrasound score (LUS)] and chest EIT [with calculation of the global inhomogeneity index, frontback center of ventilation (CoV), regional ventilation delay (RVD) and surface available for ventilation] were performed before extubation during pressure support ventilation (H0) and two hours after extubation during spontaneous breathing (H2). EIT was then repeated 6 h (H6) after extubation. EIT derived indices and LUS were compared between patients successfully extubated and patients with extubation failure. Results 40 patients were included, of whom 12 (30%) failed extubation. Before extubation, when compared with patients with successful extubation, patients who failed extubation had a higher LUS (19 vs 10, p = 0.003) and a smaller surface available for ventilation (352 vs 406 pixels, p = 0.042). After extubation, GI index and LUS were higher in the extubation failure group, whereas the surface available for ventilation was lower. The RVD and the CoV were not different between groups. Conclusion Before extubation, a loss of lung aeration was observed in patients who developed extubation failure afterwards. After extubation, this loss of lung aeration persisted and was associated with regional lung ventilation heterogeneity. Trial registration Clinical trials, NCT04180410, Registered 27 November 2019—prospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04180410

Additional file 1 of Lung aeration estimated by chest electrical impedance tomography and lung ultrasound during extubation

Additional file 1. Number of patients at each study’s visit

Additional file 4 of Lung aeration estimated by chest electrical impedance tomography and lung ultrasound during extubation

Additional file 4. Correlations between LUS and EIT derived indices (all data from H0 and H2 pooled together)

Additional file 3 of Lung aeration estimated by chest electrical impedance tomography and lung ultrasound during extubation

Additional file 3. Changes in lung aeration, regional lung ventilation and cardiac function before and after extubation, according to the extubation outcome

Additional file 2 of Lung aeration estimated by chest electrical impedance tomography and lung ultrasound during extubation

Additional file 2. Time-course evolution of EIT derived indices (Regional ventilation delay and Center of Ventilation) before and after extubation, according to the extubation status. The top panel (A) corresponds to the Regional Ventilation Delay, the bottom panel (B) to the Center of Ventilation

Auto-antibodies against type I IFNs in > 10% of critically ill COVID-19 patients: a prospective multicentre study

Abstract Background Auto-antibodies (auto-Abs) neutralizing type I interferons (IFN) have been found in about 15% of critical cases COVID-19 pneumonia and less than 1% of mild or asymptomatic cases. Determining whether auto-Abs influence presentation and outcome of critically ill COVID-19 patients could lead to specific therapeutic interventions. Our objectives were to compare the severity at admission and the mortality of patients hospitalized for critical COVID-19 in ICU with versus without auto-Abs. Results We conducted a prospective multicentre cohort study including patients admitted in 11 intensive care units (ICUs) from Great Paris area hospitals with proven SARS-CoV-2 infection and acute respiratory failure. 925 critically ill COVID-19 patients were included. Auto-Abs neutralizing type I IFN-α2, β and/or ω were found in 96 patients (10.3%). Demographics and comorbidities did not differ between patients with versus without auto-Abs. At ICU admission, Auto-Abs positive patients required a higher FiO2 (100% (70–100) vs. 90% (60–100), p = 0.01), but were not different in other characteristics. Mortality at day 28 was not different between patients with and without auto-Abs (18.7 vs. 23.7%, p = 0.279). In multivariable analysis, 28-day mortality was associated with age (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.06 [1.04–1.08], p < 0.001), SOFA score (aOR = 1.18 [1.12–1.23], p < 0.001) and immunosuppression (aOR = 1.82 [1.1–3.0], p = 0.02), but not with the presence of auto-Abs (aOR = 0.69 [0.38–1.26], p = 0.23). Conclusions In ICU patients, auto-Abs against type I IFNs were found in at least 10% of patients with critical COVID-19 pneumonia. They were not associated with day 28 mortality

Rare predicted loss-of-function variants of type I IFN immunity genes are associated with life-threatening COVID-19

BackgroundWe previously reported that impaired type I IFN activity, due to inborn errors of TLR3- and TLR7-dependent type I interferon (IFN) immunity or to autoantibodies against type I IFN, account for 15-20% of cases of life-threatening COVID-19 in unvaccinated patients. Therefore, the determinants of life-threatening COVID-19 remain to be identified in similar to 80% of cases.MethodsWe report here a genome-wide rare variant burden association analysis in 3269 unvaccinated patients with life-threatening COVID-19, and 1373 unvaccinated SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals without pneumonia. Among the 928 patients tested for autoantibodies against type I IFN, a quarter (234) were positive and were excluded.ResultsNo gene reached genome-wide significance. Under a recessive model, the most significant gene with at-risk variants was TLR7, with an OR of 27.68 (95%CI 1.5-528.7, P=1.1x10(-4)) for biochemically loss-of-function (bLOF) variants. We replicated the enrichment in rare predicted LOF (pLOF) variants at 13 influenza susceptibility loci involved in TLR3-dependent type I IFN immunity (OR=3.70[95%CI 1.3-8.2], P=2.1x10(-4)). This enrichment was further strengthened by (1) adding the recently reported TYK2 and TLR7 COVID-19 loci, particularly under a recessive model (OR=19.65[95%CI 2.1-2635.4], P=3.4x10(-3)), and (2) considering as pLOF branchpoint variants with potentially strong impacts on splicing among the 15 loci (OR=4.40[9%CI 2.3-8.4], P=7.7x10(-8)). Finally, the patients with pLOF/bLOF variants at these 15 loci were significantly younger (mean age [SD]=43.3 [20.3] years) than the other patients (56.0 [17.3] years; P=1.68x10(-5)).ConclusionsRare variants of TLR3- and TLR7-dependent type I IFN immunity genes can underlie life-threatening COVID-19, particularly with recessive inheritance, in patients under 60 years old