Background: Whether respiratory physiology of COVID-19-induced respiratory failure is different from acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) of other etiologies is unclear. We conducted a single-center study to describe respiratory mechanics and response to positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in COVID-19 ARDS and to compare COVID-19 patients to matched-control subjects with ARDS from other causes. Methods: Thirty consecutive COVID-19 patients admitted to an intensive care unit in Rome, Italy, and fulfilling moderate-to-severe ARDS criteria were enrolled within 24 h from endotracheal intubation. Gas exchange, respiratory mechanics, and ventilatory ratio were measured at PEEP of 15 and 5 cmH2O. A single-breath derecruitment maneuver was performed to assess recruitability. After 1:1 matching based on PaO2/FiO2, FiO2, PEEP, and tidal volume, COVID-19 patients were compared to subjects affected by ARDS of other etiologies who underwent the same procedures in a previous study. Results: Thirty COVID-19 patients were successfully matched with 30 ARDS from other etiologies. At low PEEP, median [25th-75th percentiles] PaO2/FiO2 in the two groups was 119 mmHg [101-142] and 116 mmHg [87-154]. Average compliance (41 ml/cmH2O [32-52] vs. 36 ml/cmH2O [27-42], p = 0.045) and ventilatory ratio (2.1 [1.7-2.3] vs. 1.6 [1.4-2.1], p = 0.032) were slightly higher in COVID-19 patients. Inter-individual variability (ratio of standard deviation to mean) of compliance was 36% in COVID-19 patients and 31% in other ARDS. In COVID-19 patients, PaO2/FiO2 was linearly correlated with respiratory system compliance (r = 0.52 p = 0.003). High PEEP improved PaO2/FiO2 in both cohorts, but more remarkably in COVID-19 patients (p = 0.005). Recruitability was not different between cohorts (p = 0.39) and was highly inter-individually variable (72% in COVID-19 patients and 64% in ARDS from other causes). In COVID-19 patients, recruitability was independent from oxygenation and respiratory mechanics changes due to PEEP. Conclusions: Early after establishment of mechanical ventilation, COVID-19 patients follow ARDS physiology, with compliance reduction related to the degree of hypoxemia, and inter-individually variable respiratory mechanics and recruitability. Physiological differences between ARDS from COVID-19 and other causes appear small.

Grieco, D. L., Bongiovanni, F., 5 6, L. C., S Menga 3 4, L., Lucio Cutuli, S., 3 4, G. P., Carelli, S., 3 4, T. M., 3 4, F. T., 3 4, G. L., 3 4, G. M. A., De Pascale, G., Urbani, A., Bocci, M. G., S Tanzarella, E., Bello, G., M Dell'Anna, A., M Maggiore 9, S., 5 6, L. B., Antonelli, M., (Abstract) Respiratory physiology of COVID-19-induced respiratory failure compared to ARDS of other etiologies, <<CRITICAL CARE>>, 2020; (1): ---. [doi:10.1186/s13054-020-03253-2] [https://hdl.handle.net/10807/166443]

Respiratory physiology of COVID-19-induced respiratory failure compared to ARDS of other etiologies

Grieco, Domenico Luca;De Pascale, Gennaro;Urbani, Andrea;Bocci, Maria Grazia;Bello, Giuseppe;Antonelli, Massimo
2020

Abstract

Background: Whether respiratory physiology of COVID-19-induced respiratory failure is different from acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) of other etiologies is unclear. We conducted a single-center study to describe respiratory mechanics and response to positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in COVID-19 ARDS and to compare COVID-19 patients to matched-control subjects with ARDS from other causes. Methods: Thirty consecutive COVID-19 patients admitted to an intensive care unit in Rome, Italy, and fulfilling moderate-to-severe ARDS criteria were enrolled within 24 h from endotracheal intubation. Gas exchange, respiratory mechanics, and ventilatory ratio were measured at PEEP of 15 and 5 cmH2O. A single-breath derecruitment maneuver was performed to assess recruitability. After 1:1 matching based on PaO2/FiO2, FiO2, PEEP, and tidal volume, COVID-19 patients were compared to subjects affected by ARDS of other etiologies who underwent the same procedures in a previous study. Results: Thirty COVID-19 patients were successfully matched with 30 ARDS from other etiologies. At low PEEP, median [25th-75th percentiles] PaO2/FiO2 in the two groups was 119 mmHg [101-142] and 116 mmHg [87-154]. Average compliance (41 ml/cmH2O [32-52] vs. 36 ml/cmH2O [27-42], p = 0.045) and ventilatory ratio (2.1 [1.7-2.3] vs. 1.6 [1.4-2.1], p = 0.032) were slightly higher in COVID-19 patients. Inter-individual variability (ratio of standard deviation to mean) of compliance was 36% in COVID-19 patients and 31% in other ARDS. In COVID-19 patients, PaO2/FiO2 was linearly correlated with respiratory system compliance (r = 0.52 p = 0.003). High PEEP improved PaO2/FiO2 in both cohorts, but more remarkably in COVID-19 patients (p = 0.005). Recruitability was not different between cohorts (p = 0.39) and was highly inter-individually variable (72% in COVID-19 patients and 64% in ARDS from other causes). In COVID-19 patients, recruitability was independent from oxygenation and respiratory mechanics changes due to PEEP. Conclusions: Early after establishment of mechanical ventilation, COVID-19 patients follow ARDS physiology, with compliance reduction related to the degree of hypoxemia, and inter-individually variable respiratory mechanics and recruitability. Physiological differences between ARDS from COVID-19 and other causes appear small.
2020
Inglese
Grieco, D. L., Bongiovanni, F., 5 6, L. C., S Menga 3 4, L., Lucio Cutuli, S., 3 4, G. P., Carelli, S., 3 4, T. M., 3 4, F. T., 3 4, G. L., 3 4, G. M. A., De Pascale, G., Urbani, A., Bocci, M. G., S Tanzarella, E., Bello, G., M Dell'Anna, A., M Maggiore 9, S., 5 6, L. B., Antonelli, M., (Abstract) Respiratory physiology of COVID-19-induced respiratory failure compared to ARDS of other etiologies, <<CRITICAL CARE>>, 2020; (1): ---. [doi:10.1186/s13054-020-03253-2] [https://hdl.handle.net/10807/166443]
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10807/166443
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 94
  • Scopus 126
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 115
social impact