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

Publisher Copyright: © 2020 The Author(s). Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.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, NCT02010073publishersversionPeer reviewe

Curso de introducción a las carreras de educación física ingreso 2019

Fil: Camblor, Ezequiel. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Hirsch, Emmanuel. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Villordo, Débora Alesia. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Farías, Daniel Andrés. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Medina, Juan Cruz. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Ramírez, Facundo. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Kopelovich, Pablo. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Vidal, María Fabiana. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Patow, Verónica. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Trybalski, María Isabel. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Sánchez, Pablo. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Emiliozzi, María Valeria. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Viñes, Nicolás. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Benavidez, Ariel Alejandro. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Renati, María Cecilia. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Mele, Ayelén Magalí. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Tellechea, María Soledad. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Gárgano, Sofía. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Torrontegui, Adrián César. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Mazzuchi López, María Belén. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Giglio, Martín. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Carriquiriborde, Nicolás. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Domínguez, María Eugenia. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Maiori, Marco. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina

Curso de introducción a las carreras de educación física ingreso 2019

Fil: Camblor, Ezequiel. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Hirsch, Emmanuel. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Villordo, Débora Alesia. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Farías, Daniel Andrés. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Medina, Juan Cruz. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Ramírez, Facundo. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Kopelovich, Pablo. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Vidal, María Fabiana. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Patow, Verónica. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Trybalski, María Isabel. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Sánchez, Pablo. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Emiliozzi, María Valeria. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Viñes, Nicolás. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Benavidez, Ariel Alejandro. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Renati, María Cecilia. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Mele, Ayelén Magalí. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Tellechea, María Soledad. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Gárgano, Sofía. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Torrontegui, Adrián César. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Mazzuchi López, María Belén. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Giglio, Martín. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Carriquiriborde, Nicolás. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Domínguez, María Eugenia. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.Fil: Maiori, Marco. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina

Immunocompromised patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome : Secondary analysis of the LUNG SAFE database

The aim of this study was to describe data on epidemiology, ventilatory management, and outcome of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in immunocompromised patients. Methods: We performed a post hoc analysis on the cohort of immunocompromised patients enrolled in the Large Observational Study to Understand the Global Impact of Severe Acute Respiratory Failure (LUNG SAFE) study. The LUNG SAFE study was an international, prospective study including hypoxemic patients in 459 ICUs from 50 countries across 5 continents. Results: Of 2813 patients with ARDS, 584 (20.8%) were immunocompromised, 38.9% of whom had an unspecified cause. Pneumonia, nonpulmonary sepsis, and noncardiogenic shock were their most common risk factors for ARDS. Hospital mortality was higher in immunocompromised than in immunocompetent patients (52.4% vs 36.2%; p < 0.0001), despite similar severity of ARDS. Decisions regarding limiting life-sustaining measures were significantly more frequent in immunocompromised patients (27.1% vs 18.6%; p < 0.0001). Use of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) as first-line treatment was higher in immunocompromised patients (20.9% vs 15.9%; p = 0.0048), and immunodeficiency remained independently associated with the use of NIV after adjustment for confounders. Forty-eight percent of the patients treated with NIV were intubated, and their mortality was not different from that of the patients invasively ventilated ab initio. Conclusions: Immunosuppression is frequent in patients with ARDS, and infections are the main risk factors for ARDS in these immunocompromised patients. Their management differs from that of immunocompetent patients, particularly the greater use of NIV as first-line ventilation strategy. Compared with immunocompetent subjects, they have higher mortality regardless of ARDS severity as well as a higher frequency of limitation of life-sustaining measures. Nonetheless, nearly half of these patients survive to hospital discharge. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02010073. Registered on 12 December 2013

Immunocompromised patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: Secondary analysis of the LUNG SAFE database

Background: The aim of this study was to describe data on epidemiology, ventilatory management, and outcome of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in immunocompromised patients. Methods: We performed a post hoc analysis on the cohort of immunocompromised patients enrolled in the Large Observational Study to Understand the Global Impact of Severe Acute Respiratory Failure (LUNG SAFE) study. The LUNG SAFE study was an international, prospective study including hypoxemic patients in 459 ICUs from 50 countries across 5 continents. Results: Of 2813 patients with ARDS, 584 (20.8%) were immunocompromised, 38.9% of whom had an unspecified cause. Pneumonia, nonpulmonary sepsis, and noncardiogenic shock were their most common risk factors for ARDS. Hospital mortality was higher in immunocompromised than in immunocompetent patients (52.4% vs 36.2%; p &lt; 0.0001), despite similar severity of ARDS. Decisions regarding limiting life-sustaining measures were significantly more frequent in immunocompromised patients (27.1% vs 18.6%; p &lt; 0.0001). Use of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) as first-line treatment was higher in immunocompromised patients (20.9% vs 15.9%; p = 0.0048), and immunodeficiency remained independently associated with the use of NIV after adjustment for confounders. Forty-eight percent of the patients treated with NIV were intubated, and their mortality was not different from that of the patients invasively ventilated ab initio. Conclusions: Immunosuppression is frequent in patients with ARDS, and infections are the main risk factors for ARDS in these immunocompromised patients. Their management differs from that of immunocompetent patients, particularly the greater use of NIV as first-line ventilation strategy. Compared with immunocompetent subjects, they have higher mortality regardless of ARDS severity as well as a higher frequency of limitation of life-sustaining measures. Nonetheless, nearly half of these patients survive to hospital discharge. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02010073. Registered on 12 December 2013

Mechanical ventilation in patients with cardiogenic pulmonary edema : a sub-analysis of the LUNG SAFE study

Patients with acute respiratory failure caused by cardiogenic pulmonary edema (CPE) may require mechanical ventilation that can cause further lung damage. Our aim was to determine the impact of ventilatory settings on CPE mortality. Patients from the LUNG SAFE cohort, a multicenter prospective cohort study of patients undergoing mechanical ventilation, were studied. Relationships between ventilatory parameters and outcomes (ICU discharge/hospital mortality) were assessed using latent mixture analysis and a marginal structural model. From 4499 patients, 391 meeting CPE criteria (median age 70 [interquartile range 59-78], 40% female) were included. ICU and hospital mortality were 34% and 40%, respectively. ICU survivors were younger (67 [57-77] vs 74 [64-80] years, p < 0.001) and had lower driving (12 [8-16] vs 15 [11-17] cmHO, p < 0.001), plateau (20 [15-23] vs 22 [19-26] cmHO, p < 0.001) and peak (21 [17-27] vs 26 [20-32] cmHO, p < 0.001) pressures. Latent mixture analysis of patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation on ICU day 1 revealed a subgroup ventilated with high pressures with lower probability of being discharged alive from the ICU (hazard ratio [HR] 0.79 [95% confidence interval 0.60-1.05], p = 0.103) and increased hospital mortality (HR 1.65 [1.16-2.36], p = 0.005). In a marginal structural model, driving pressures in the first week (HR 1.12 [1.06-1.18], p < 0.001) and tidal volume after day 7 (HR 0.69 [0.52-0.93], p = 0.015) were related to survival. Higher airway pressures in invasively ventilated patients with CPE are related to mortality. These patients may be exposed to an increased risk of ventilator-induced lung injury. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02010073

Mechanical ventilation in patients with cardiogenic pulmonary edema: a sub-analysis of the LUNG SAFE study

International audienceBackground: Patients with acute respiratory failure caused by cardiogenic pulmonary edema (CPE) may require mechanical ventilation that can cause further lung damage. Our aim was to determine the impact of ventilatory settings on CPE mortality. Methods: Patients from the LUNG SAFE cohort, a multicenter prospective cohort study of patients undergoing mechanical ventilation, were studied. Relationships between ventilatory parameters and outcomes (ICU discharge/ hospital mortality) were assessed using latent mixture analysis and a marginal structural model. Results: From 4499 patients, 391 meeting CPE criteria (median age 70 [interquartile range 59-78], 40% female) were included. ICU and hospital mortality were 34% and 40%, respectively. ICU survivors were younger (67 [57-77] vs 74 [64-80] years, p < 0.001) and had lower driving (12 [8-16] vs 15 [11-17] cmH 2 O, p < 0.001), plateau (20 [15-23] vs 22 [19-26] cmH 2 O, p < 0.001) and peak (21 [17-27] vs 26 [20-32] cmH 2 O, p < 0.001) pressures. Latent mixture analysis of patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation on ICU day 1 revealed a subgroup ventilated with high pressures with lower probability of being discharged alive from the ICU (hazard ratio [HR] 0.79 [95% confidence interval 0.60-1.05], p = 0.103) and increased hospital mortality (HR 1.65 [1.16-2.36], p = 0.005). In a marginal structural model, driving pressures in the first week (HR 1.12 [1.06-1.18], p < 0.001) and tidal volume after day 7 (HR 0.69 [0.52-0.93], p = 0.015) were related to survival. Conclusions: Higher airway pressures in invasively ventilated patients with CPE are related to mortality. These patients may be exposed to an increased risk of ventilator-induced lung injury

Mechanical ventilation in patients with cardiogenic pulmonary edema: a sub-analysis of the LUNG SAFE study

Background: Patients with acute respiratory failure caused by cardiogenic pulmonary edema (CPE) may require mechanical ventilation that can cause further lung damage. Our aim was to determine the impact of ventilatory settings on CPE mortality. Methods: Patients from the LUNG SAFE cohort, a multicenter prospective cohort study of patients undergoing mechanical ventilation, were studied. Relationships between ventilatory parameters and outcomes (ICU discharge/hospital mortality) were assessed using latent mixture analysis and a marginal structural model. Results: From 4499 patients, 391 meeting CPE criteria (median age 70 [interquartile range 59-78], 40% female) were included. ICU and hospital mortality were 34% and 40%, respectively. ICU survivors were younger (67 [57-77] vs 74 [64-80] years, p &lt; 0.001) and had lower driving (12 [8-16] vs 15 [11-17] cmH2O, p &lt; 0.001), plateau (20 [15-23] vs 22 [19-26] cmH2O, p &lt; 0.001) and peak (21 [17-27] vs 26 [20-32] cmH2O, p &lt; 0.001) pressures. Latent mixture analysis of patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation on ICU day 1 revealed a subgroup ventilated with high pressures with lower probability of being discharged alive from the ICU (hazard ratio [HR] 0.79 [95% confidence interval 0.60-1.05], p = 0.103) and increased hospital mortality (HR 1.65 [1.16-2.36], p = 0.005). In a marginal structural model, driving pressures in the first week (HR 1.12 [1.06-1.18], p &lt; 0.001) and tidal volume after day 7 (HR 0.69 [0.52-0.93], p = 0.015) were related to survival. Conclusions: Higher airway pressures in invasively ventilated patients with CPE are related to mortality. These patients may be exposed to an increased risk of ventilator-induced lung injury. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02010073

Outcome of acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure: insights from the LUNG SAFE Study

Background: Current incidence and outcome of patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit (ICU) are unknown, especially for patients not meeting criteria for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Methods: An international, multicentre, prospective cohort study of patients presenting with hypoxaemia early in the course of mechanical ventilation, conducted during four consecutive weeks in the winter of 2014 in 459 ICUs from 50 countries (LUNG SAFE). Patients were enrolled with arterial oxygen tension/inspiratory oxygen fraction ratio ≤300 mmHg, new pulmonary infiltrates and need for mechanical ventilation with a positive end-expiratory pressure of ≥5 cmH2O. ICU prevalence, causes of hypoxaemia, hospital survival and factors associated with hospital mortality were measured. Patients with unilateral versus bilateral opacities were compared. Findings: 12 906 critically ill patients received mechanical ventilation and 34.9% with hypoxaemia and new infiltrates were enrolled, separated into ARDS (69.0%), unilateral infiltrate (22.7%) and congestive heart failure (CHF; 8.2%). The global hospital mortality was 38.6%. CHF patients had a mortality comparable to ARDS (44.1% versus 40.4%). Patients with unilateral-infiltrate had lower unadjusted mortality, but similar adjusted mortality compared to those with ARDS. The number of quadrants on chest imaging was associated with an increased risk of death. There was no difference in mortality comparing patients with unilateral-infiltrate and ARDS with only two quadrants involved. Interpretation: More than one-third of patients receiving mechanical ventilation have hypoxaemia and new infiltrates with a hospital mortality of 38.6%. Survival is dependent on the degree of pulmonary involvement whether or not ARDS criteria are reached