Acute Respiratory Failure From Early Pandemic COVID-19

Julia M. Fisher PhD , Vignesh Subbian PhD , Patrick Essay PhD , Sarah Pungitore MS , Edward J. Bedrick PhD , Jarrod M. Mosier MD
{"title":"Acute Respiratory Failure From Early Pandemic COVID-19","authors":"Julia M. Fisher PhD ,&nbsp;Vignesh Subbian PhD ,&nbsp;Patrick Essay PhD ,&nbsp;Sarah Pungitore MS ,&nbsp;Edward J. Bedrick PhD ,&nbsp;Jarrod M. Mosier MD","doi":"10.1016/j.chstcc.2023.100030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The optimal strategy for initial respiratory support in patients with respiratory failure associated with COVID-19 is unclear, and the initial strategy may affect outcomes.</p></div><div><h3>Research Question</h3><p>Which initial respiratory support strategy is associated with improved outcomes in patients with COVID-19 with acute respiratory failure?</p></div><div><h3>Study Design and Methods</h3><p>All patients with COVID-19 requiring respiratory support and admitted to a large health care network were eligible for inclusion. We compared patients treated initially with noninvasive respiratory support (NIRS; noninvasive positive pressure ventilation by facemask or high-flow nasal oxygen) with patients treated initially with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). The primary outcome was time to in-hospital death analyzed using an inverse probability of treatment weighted Cox model adjusted for potential confounders. Secondary outcomes included unweighted and weighted assessments of mortality, lengths of stay (ICU and hospital), and time to intubation.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Nearly one-half of the 2,354 patients (47%) who met inclusion criteria received IMV first, and 53% received initial NIRS. Overall, in-hospital mortality was 38% (37% for IMV and 39% for NIRS). Initial NIRS was associated with an increased hazard of death compared with initial IMV (hazard ratio, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.03-1.94), but also an increased hazard of leaving the hospital sooner that waned with time (noninvasive support by time interaction: hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95-0.98).</p></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><p>Patients with COVID-19 with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure initially treated with NIRS showed an increased hazard of in-hospital death.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93934,"journal":{"name":"CHEST critical care","volume":"2 1","pages":"Article 100030"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949788423000308/pdfft?md5=1f21379c24185e9e59ee272264281b21&pid=1-s2.0-S2949788423000308-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CHEST critical care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949788423000308","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The optimal strategy for initial respiratory support in patients with respiratory failure associated with COVID-19 is unclear, and the initial strategy may affect outcomes.

Research Question

Which initial respiratory support strategy is associated with improved outcomes in patients with COVID-19 with acute respiratory failure?

Study Design and Methods

All patients with COVID-19 requiring respiratory support and admitted to a large health care network were eligible for inclusion. We compared patients treated initially with noninvasive respiratory support (NIRS; noninvasive positive pressure ventilation by facemask or high-flow nasal oxygen) with patients treated initially with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). The primary outcome was time to in-hospital death analyzed using an inverse probability of treatment weighted Cox model adjusted for potential confounders. Secondary outcomes included unweighted and weighted assessments of mortality, lengths of stay (ICU and hospital), and time to intubation.

Results

Nearly one-half of the 2,354 patients (47%) who met inclusion criteria received IMV first, and 53% received initial NIRS. Overall, in-hospital mortality was 38% (37% for IMV and 39% for NIRS). Initial NIRS was associated with an increased hazard of death compared with initial IMV (hazard ratio, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.03-1.94), but also an increased hazard of leaving the hospital sooner that waned with time (noninvasive support by time interaction: hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95-0.98).

Interpretation

Patients with COVID-19 with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure initially treated with NIRS showed an increased hazard of in-hospital death.

早期大流行病 COVID-19 引起的急性呼吸衰竭:无创呼吸支持与机械通气
背景COVID-19相关呼吸衰竭患者初始呼吸支持的最佳策略尚不明确,初始策略可能会影响预后。研究问题哪种初始呼吸支持策略与COVID-19急性呼吸衰竭患者预后的改善相关? 研究设计与方法所有需要呼吸支持并入住大型医疗保健网络的COVID-19患者均符合纳入条件。我们将最初接受无创呼吸支持(NIRS;面罩无创正压通气或高流量鼻氧)治疗的患者与最初接受有创机械通气(IMV)治疗的患者进行了比较。主要结果是院内死亡时间,采用逆治疗概率加权 Cox 模型进行分析,并对潜在混杂因素进行调整。次要结果包括死亡率、住院时间(重症监护室和医院)和插管时间的非加权和加权评估。结果在符合纳入标准的2354名患者中,近二分之一(47%)的患者首先接受了IMV,53%的患者接受了初始NIRS。总体而言,院内死亡率为 38%(IMV 为 37%,NIRS 为 39%)。与初始 IMV 相比,初始 NIRS 增加了患者的死亡风险(风险比为 1.42;95% CI 为 1.03-1.94),但同时也增加了患者提前出院的风险,且随着时间的推移,这种风险逐渐降低(无创支持与时间的交互作用:风险比为 0.97;95% CI 为 0.95-0.98)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CHEST critical care
CHEST critical care Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine, Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信