Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, 325 9th Avenue, Box # 359640, Seattle, WA, 98104, USA.
Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Crit Care. 2021 Sep 15;25(1):336. doi: 10.1186/s13054-021-03755-7.
Acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (HRF) is associated with high morbidity and mortality, but its heterogeneity challenges the identification of effective therapies. Defining subphenotypes with distinct prognoses or biologic features can improve therapeutic trials, but prior work has focused on ARDS, which excludes many acute HRF patients. We aimed to characterize persistent and resolving subphenotypes in the broader HRF population.
In this secondary analysis of 2 independent prospective ICU cohorts, we included adults with acute HRF, defined by invasive mechanical ventilation and PaO-to-FIO ratio ≤ 300 on cohort enrollment (n = 768 in the discovery cohort and n = 1715 in the validation cohort). We classified patients as persistent HRF if still requiring mechanical ventilation with PaO-to-FIO ratio ≤ 300 on day 3 following ICU admission, or resolving HRF if otherwise. We estimated relative risk of 28-day hospital mortality associated with persistent HRF, compared to resolving HRF, using generalized linear models. We also estimated fold difference in circulating biomarkers of inflammation and endothelial activation on cohort enrollment among persistent HRF compared to resolving HRF. Finally, we stratified our analyses by ARDS to understand whether this was driving differences between persistent and resolving HRF.
Over 50% developed persistent HRF in both the discovery (n = 386) and validation (n = 1032) cohorts. Persistent HRF was associated with higher risk of death relative to resolving HRF in both the discovery (1.68-fold, 95% CI 1.11, 2.54) and validation cohorts (1.93-fold, 95% CI 1.50, 2.47), after adjustment for age, sex, chronic respiratory illness, and acute illness severity on enrollment (APACHE-III in discovery, APACHE-II in validation). Patients with persistent HRF displayed higher biomarkers of inflammation (interleukin-6, interleukin-8) and endothelial dysfunction (angiopoietin-2) than resolving HRF after adjustment. Only half of persistent HRF patients had ARDS, yet exhibited higher mortality and biomarkers than resolving HRF regardless of whether they qualified for ARDS.
Patients with persistent HRF are common and have higher mortality and elevated circulating markers of lung injury compared to resolving HRF, and yet only a subset are captured by ARDS definitions. Persistent HRF may represent a clinically important, inclusive target for future therapeutic trials in HRF.
急性低氧性呼吸衰竭(HRF)与高发病率和死亡率相关,但它的异质性使得确定有效的治疗方法具有挑战性。定义具有不同预后或生物学特征的亚表型可以改善治疗试验,但之前的工作集中在 ARDS 上,这排除了许多急性 HRF 患者。我们旨在描述更广泛的 HRF 人群中持续性和缓解性亚表型。
这是对 2 个独立的前瞻性 ICU 队列的二次分析,我们纳入了急性 HRF 患者,定义为在队列入组时需要有创机械通气和 PaO 至 FIO 比值≤300(在发现队列中 n=768,在验证队列中 n=1715)。如果患者在 ICU 入院后第 3 天仍需要机械通气且 PaO 至 FIO 比值≤300,则将其归类为持续性 HRF;否则为缓解性 HRF。我们使用广义线性模型估计 28 天住院死亡率与持续性 HRF 相关的相对风险,与缓解性 HRF 相比。我们还估计了在发现队列中,持续性 HRF 与缓解性 HRF 相比,炎症和内皮激活的循环生物标志物的倍数差异。最后,我们按 ARDS 对我们的分析进行分层,以了解持续性和缓解性 HRF 之间的差异是否由 ARDS 引起。
在发现队列(n=386)和验证队列(n=1032)中,超过 50%的患者发展为持续性 HRF。与缓解性 HRF 相比,持续性 HRF 在发现队列(1.68 倍,95%CI 1.11,2.54)和验证队列(1.93 倍,95%CI 1.50,2.47)中均与死亡风险更高相关,调整了入组时的年龄、性别、慢性呼吸系统疾病和急性疾病严重程度(发现队列中的 APACHE-III,验证队列中的 APACHE-II)。与缓解性 HRF 相比,持续性 HRF 患者的炎症标志物(白细胞介素-6、白细胞介素-8)和内皮功能障碍标志物(血管生成素-2)在调整后更高。尽管只有一半的持续性 HRF 患者患有 ARDS,但无论他们是否符合 ARDS 定义,他们的死亡率和生物标志物都高于缓解性 HRF。
持续性 HRF 患者很常见,与缓解性 HRF 相比,死亡率更高,循环肺损伤标志物水平升高,但只有一部分符合 ARDS 定义。持续性 HRF 可能代表 HRF 未来治疗试验中一个重要的、包容性的目标。