Department of Women's and Children's Health, Stockholm, Sweden.
Department of Clinical Science and Education Södersjukhuset, Section for Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2021 Mar;65(3):360-363. doi: 10.1111/aas.13741. Epub 2020 Nov 22.
The management of COVID-19 ARDS is debated. Although current evidence does not suggest an atypical acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), the physiological response to prone positioning is not fully understood and it is unclear which patients benefit. We aimed to determine whether proning increases oxygenation and to evaluate responders.
This case series from a single, tertiary university hospital includes all mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 and proning between 17 March 2020 and 19 May 2020. The primary measure was change in PaO :FiO .
Forty-four patients, 32 males/12 females, were treated with proning for a total of 138 sessions, with median (range) two (1-8) sessions. Median (IQR) time for the five sessions was 14 (12-17) hours. In the first session, median (IQR) PaO :FiO increased from 104 (86-122) to 161 (127-207) mm Hg (P < .001). 36/44 patients (82%) improved in PaO :FiO , with a significant increase in PaO :FiO in the first three sessions. Median (IQR) FiO decreased from 0.7 (0.6-0.8) to 0.5 (0.35-0.6) (<0.001). A significant decrease occurred in the first three sessions. PaO , tidal volumes, PEEP, mean arterial pressure (MAP), and norepinephrine infusion did not differ. Primarily, patients with PaO :FiO approximately < 120 mm Hg before treatment responded to proning. Age, sex, BMI, or SAPS 3 did not predict success in increasing PaO :FiO .
Proning increased PaO :FiO , primarily in patients with PaO :FiO approximately < 120 mm Hg, with a consistency over three sessions. No characteristic was associated with non-responding, why proning may be considered in most patients. Further study is required to evaluate mortality.
COVID-19 急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)的治疗存在争议。尽管目前的证据表明不存在非典型性 ARDS,但人们对俯卧位通气的生理反应仍不完全了解,也不清楚哪些患者受益。本研究旨在确定俯卧位通气是否能增加氧合,并评估其疗效。
这是一家单中心三级大学医院的病例系列研究,纳入了 2020 年 3 月 17 日至 2020 年 5 月 19 日期间接受有创机械通气和俯卧位通气的所有 COVID-19 患者。主要观察指标为动脉血氧分压(PaO )与吸入氧分数(FiO )比值(PaO :FiO )的变化。
共纳入 44 例患者,男 32 例,女 12 例,共接受 138 次俯卧位通气治疗,中位(范围)次数为 2(1-8)次。5 次俯卧位通气的中位(四分位数间距)时间为 14(12-17)小时。首次俯卧位通气时,PaO :FiO 从 104(86-122)mmHg 增加至 161(127-207)mmHg(P <0.001)。44 例患者中有 36 例(82%)的 PaO :FiO 得到改善,首次 3 次俯卧位通气时 PaO :FiO 显著增加。首次 3 次俯卧位通气时,吸入氧分数(FiO )从 0.7(0.6-0.8)降至 0.5(0.35-0.6)(<0.001)。首次 3 次俯卧位通气时,动脉血氧分压(PaO )、潮气量、呼气末正压(PEEP)、平均动脉压(MAP)和去甲肾上腺素输注均无差异。治疗前 PaO :FiO 比值约<120mmHg 的患者对俯卧位通气的反应更明显。年龄、性别、BMI 或 SAPS 3 评分不能预测 PaO :FiO 比值增加的效果。
俯卧位通气增加了 PaO :FiO 比值,主要在 PaO :FiO 比值约<120mmHg 的患者中,且在 3 次俯卧位通气后仍持续有效。没有特征可以预测俯卧位通气治疗的反应,因此大多数患者都可以考虑接受俯卧位通气治疗。需要进一步研究来评估死亡率。