42
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Acute respiratory distress syndrome

      review-article
      , PhD a , , Prof, MD a , b , *
      Lancet (London, England)
      Elsevier Ltd.

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Summary

          Acute respiratory distress syndrome presents as hypoxia and bilateral pulmonary infiltrates on chest imaging in the absence of heart failure sufficient to account for this clinical state. Management is largely supportive, and is focused on protective mechanical ventilation and the avoidance of fluid overload. Patients with severe hypoxaemia can be managed with early short-term use of neuromuscular blockade, prone position ventilation, or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The use of inhaled nitric oxide is rarely indicated and both β 2 agonists and late corticosteroids should be avoided. Mortality remains at approximately 30%.

          Related collections

          Most cited references95

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Effect of a protective-ventilation strategy on mortality in the acute respiratory distress syndrome.

          In patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome, massive alveolar collapse and cyclic lung reopening and overdistention during mechanical ventilation may perpetuate alveolar injury. We determined whether a ventilatory strategy designed to minimize such lung injuries could reduce not only pulmonary complications but also mortality at 28 days in patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome. We randomly assigned 53 patients with early acute respiratory distress syndrome (including 28 described previously), all of whom were receiving identical hemodynamic and general support, to conventional or protective mechanical ventilation. Conventional ventilation was based on the strategy of maintaining the lowest positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) for acceptable oxygenation, with a tidal volume of 12 ml per kilogram of body weight and normal arterial carbon dioxide levels (35 to 38 mm Hg). Protective ventilation involved end-expiratory pressures above the lower inflection point on the static pressure-volume curve, a tidal volume of less than 6 ml per kilogram, driving pressures of less than 20 cm of water above the PEEP value, permissive hypercapnia, and preferential use of pressure-limited ventilatory modes. After 28 days, 11 of 29 patients (38 percent) in the protective-ventilation group had died, as compared with 17 of 24 (71 percent) in the conventional-ventilation group (P<0.001). The rates of weaning from mechanical ventilation were 66 percent in the protective-ventilation group and 29 percent in the conventional-ventilation group (P=0.005): the rates of clinical barotrauma were 7 percent and 42 percent, respectively (P=0.02), despite the use of higher PEEP and mean airway pressures in the protective-ventilation group. The difference in survival to hospital discharge was not significant; 13 of 29 patients (45 percent) in the protective-ventilation group died in the hospital, as compared with 17 of 24 in the conventional-ventilation group (71 percent, P=0.37). As compared with conventional ventilation, the protective strategy was associated with improved survival at 28 days, a higher rate of weaning from mechanical ventilation, and a lower rate of barotrauma in patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome. Protective ventilation was not associated with a higher rate of survival to hospital discharge.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for 2009 Influenza A(H1N1) Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

            The novel influenza A(H1N1) pandemic affected Australia and New Zealand during the 2009 southern hemisphere winter. It caused an epidemic of critical illness and some patients developed severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and were treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). To describe the characteristics of all patients with 2009 influenza A(H1N1)-associated ARDS treated with ECMO and to report incidence, resource utilization, and patient outcomes. An observational study of all patients (n = 68) with 2009 influenza A(H1N1)-associated ARDS treated with ECMO in 15 intensive care units (ICUs) in Australia and New Zealand between June 1 and August 31, 2009. Incidence, clinical features, degree of pulmonary dysfunction, technical characteristics, duration of ECMO, complications, and survival. Sixty-eight patients with severe influenza-associated ARDS were treated with ECMO, of whom 61 had either confirmed 2009 influenza A(H1N1) (n = 53) or influenza A not subtyped (n = 8), representing an incidence rate of 2.6 ECMO cases per million population. An additional 133 patients with influenza A received mechanical ventilation but no ECMO in the same ICUs. The 68 patients who received ECMO had a median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 34.4 (26.6-43.1) years and 34 patients (50%) were men. Before ECMO, patients had severe respiratory failure despite advanced mechanical ventilatory support with a median (IQR) Pao(2)/fraction of inspired oxygen (Fio(2)) ratio of 56 (48-63), positive end-expiratory pressure of 18 (15-20) cm H(2)O, and an acute lung injury score of 3.8 (3.5-4.0). The median (IQR) duration of ECMO support was 10 (7-15) days. At the time of reporting, 48 of the 68 patients (71%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 60%-82%) had survived to ICU discharge, of whom 32 had survived to hospital discharge and 16 remained as hospital inpatients. Fourteen patients (21%; 95% CI, 11%-30%) had died and 6 remained in the ICU, 2 of whom were still receiving ECMO. During June to August 2009 in Australia and New Zealand, the ICUs at regional referral centers provided mechanical ventilation for many patients with 2009 influenza A(H1N1)-associated respiratory failure, one-third of whom received ECMO. These ECMO-treated patients were often young adults with severe hypoxemia and had a 21% mortality rate at the end of the study period.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Positive end-expiratory pressure setting in adults with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized controlled trial.

              The need for lung protection is universally accepted, but the optimal level of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in patients with acute lung injury (ALI) or acute respiratory distress syndrome remains debated. To compare the effect on outcome of a strategy for setting PEEP aimed at increasing alveolar recruitment while limiting hyperinflation to one aimed at minimizing alveolar distension in patients with ALI. A multicenter randomized controlled trial of 767 adults (mean [SD] age, 59.9 [15.4] years) with ALI conducted in 37 intensive care units in France from September 2002 to December 2005. Tidal volume was set at 6 mL/kg of predicted body weight in both strategies. Patients were randomly assigned to a moderate PEEP strategy (5-9 cm H(2)O) (minimal distension strategy; n = 382) or to a level of PEEP set to reach a plateau pressure of 28 to 30 cm H(2)O (increased recruitment strategy; n = 385). The primary end point was mortality at 28 days. Secondary end points were hospital mortality at 60 days, ventilator-free days, and organ failure-free days at 28 days. The 28-day mortality rate in the minimal distension group was 31.2% (n = 119) vs 27.8% (n = 107) in the increased recruitment group (relative risk, 1.12 [95% confidence interval, 0.90-1.40]; P = .31). The hospital mortality rate in the minimal distension group was 39.0% (n = 149) vs 35.4% (n = 136) in the increased recruitment group (relative risk, 1.10 [95% confidence interval, 0.92-1.32]; P = .30). The increased recruitment group compared with the minimal distension group had a higher median number of ventilator-free days (7 [interquartile range {IQR}, 0-19] vs 3 [IQR, 0-17]; P = .04) and organ failure-free days (6 [IQR, 0-18] vs 2 [IQR, 0-16]; P = .04). This strategy also was associated with higher compliance values, better oxygenation, less use of adjunctive therapies, and larger fluid requirements. A strategy for setting PEEP aimed at increasing alveolar recruitment while limiting hyperinflation did not significantly reduce mortality. However, it did improve lung function and reduced the duration of mechanical ventilation and the duration of organ failure. clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00188058.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Lancet
                Lancet
                Lancet (London, England)
                Elsevier Ltd.
                0140-6736
                1474-547X
                28 April 2016
                12-18 November 2016
                28 April 2016
                : 388
                : 10058
                : 2416-2430
                Affiliations
                [a ]Regional Intensive Care Unit, Royal Victoria Hospital, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK
                [b ]Wellcome-Wolfson Institute for Experimental Medicine, Queen's University of Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence to: Prof Daniel F McAuley, Wellcome-Wolfson Institute for Experimental Medicine, Queen's University of Belfast, 97 Lisburn Road, Belfast BT9 7AE, Northern Ireland, UK d.f.mcauley@ 123456qub.ac.uk
                Article
                S0140-6736(16)00578-X
                10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00578-X
                7138018
                27133972
                bf8f575f-091d-4fc9-8442-e5c6349a61bc
                Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                Categories
                Article

                Medicine
                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article