Practice pattern of aerosol drug therapy in ARDS patients: A secondary analysis of the Aero-in-ICU study

Sanjay Singhal , Sai Saran , Krupal Joshi , Mohan Gurjar , Parnandi Bhaskar Rao , Jyoti Narayan Sahoo , Ruchi Dua , Alok Kumar Sahoo , Ankur Sharma , Sonika Agarwal , Arun Sharma , Pralay Shankar Ghosh , Nikhil Kothari , Kunal Deokar , Sudipta Mukherjee , Prakhar Sharma , BPS Sreedevi , Prakash Sivaramakrishnan , Umadri Singh , Dhivya Sundaram , Avinash Agrawal
{"title":"Practice pattern of aerosol drug therapy in ARDS patients: A secondary analysis of the Aero-in-ICU study","authors":"Sanjay Singhal ,&nbsp;Sai Saran ,&nbsp;Krupal Joshi ,&nbsp;Mohan Gurjar ,&nbsp;Parnandi Bhaskar Rao ,&nbsp;Jyoti Narayan Sahoo ,&nbsp;Ruchi Dua ,&nbsp;Alok Kumar Sahoo ,&nbsp;Ankur Sharma ,&nbsp;Sonika Agarwal ,&nbsp;Arun Sharma ,&nbsp;Pralay Shankar Ghosh ,&nbsp;Nikhil Kothari ,&nbsp;Kunal Deokar ,&nbsp;Sudipta Mukherjee ,&nbsp;Prakhar Sharma ,&nbsp;BPS Sreedevi ,&nbsp;Prakash Sivaramakrishnan ,&nbsp;Umadri Singh ,&nbsp;Dhivya Sundaram ,&nbsp;Avinash Agrawal","doi":"10.1016/j.jointm.2025.05.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The potential role of aerosol drug therapy (ADT) in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remains uncertain. The objective of this study is to determine the prevalence and practice patterns of ADT in patients with ARDS.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This secondary analysis of a prospective observational multi-centric cohort study done in critically ill patients to know the ADT practice pattern was conducted in nine participating intensive care units (ICUs) across India between November 2022 and March 2023. The study recruited newly admitted adult patients (age &gt;18 years) who had an artificial airway and required mechanical ventilation (invasive or non‑invasive). These patients were followed up for the next 14 days or until ICU discharge or death. This secondary analysis collected data about screened patients with ARDS, related to each aerosol therapy including ongoing respiratory support, type of drug, and aerosol‑generating device, including ongoing respiratory support, type of drug, and aerosol‑generating device.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Fifty-three (24.3%) of the 218 patients had ARDS, with a mean age of (60.2±14.8) years. At admission, the acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE II) and sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score of the recruited patients were 17.4±7.1 and 7.7±4.0, respectively. Respiratory support was provided with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) alone, non-invasive ventilation (NIV) alone, or both in 45.3%, 24.5%, and 30.2% of patients, respectively. The mean duration of the ICU stay was (6.4 ± 4.0) days. Of the 53 patients with ARDS, 51 (96.2%) received 1285 aerosol sessions during follow-up for 330 patient days. Of all patients with ARDS who received aerosol therapy, 71.4% were prescribed while on IMV and 25.7% on NIV. A single drug was used in 60.7% of the aerosol sessions used a single drug, and 39.3% were prescribed combination drugs. Shorter-acting bronchodilators were the predominant drugs, with jet nebulizers (55.4%) being the most commonly used aerosol generators. These were followed by ultrasonic (23.1%) and vibrating-mesh nebulizers (21.5 %). During IMV, only in 50.1% of aerosol sessions (460 out of 918) was an aerosol generator placed at the optimum position (15–30 cm away from the Y-junction).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Aerosol therapy is frequently used in ARDS, with bronchodilators being the most common drug. The jet nebulizer is the most familiar aerosol-generating device, but only half of the aerosol sessions are at the optimum position during invasive mechanical ventilation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73799,"journal":{"name":"Journal of intensive medicine","volume":"5 4","pages":"Pages 385-391"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of intensive medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667100X25000490","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 potential role of aerosol drug therapy (ADT) in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remains uncertain. The objective of this study is to determine the prevalence and practice patterns of ADT in patients with ARDS.

Methods

This secondary analysis of a prospective observational multi-centric cohort study done in critically ill patients to know the ADT practice pattern was conducted in nine participating intensive care units (ICUs) across India between November 2022 and March 2023. The study recruited newly admitted adult patients (age >18 years) who had an artificial airway and required mechanical ventilation (invasive or non‑invasive). These patients were followed up for the next 14 days or until ICU discharge or death. This secondary analysis collected data about screened patients with ARDS, related to each aerosol therapy including ongoing respiratory support, type of drug, and aerosol‑generating device, including ongoing respiratory support, type of drug, and aerosol‑generating device.

Results

Fifty-three (24.3%) of the 218 patients had ARDS, with a mean age of (60.2±14.8) years. At admission, the acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE II) and sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score of the recruited patients were 17.4±7.1 and 7.7±4.0, respectively. Respiratory support was provided with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) alone, non-invasive ventilation (NIV) alone, or both in 45.3%, 24.5%, and 30.2% of patients, respectively. The mean duration of the ICU stay was (6.4 ± 4.0) days. Of the 53 patients with ARDS, 51 (96.2%) received 1285 aerosol sessions during follow-up for 330 patient days. Of all patients with ARDS who received aerosol therapy, 71.4% were prescribed while on IMV and 25.7% on NIV. A single drug was used in 60.7% of the aerosol sessions used a single drug, and 39.3% were prescribed combination drugs. Shorter-acting bronchodilators were the predominant drugs, with jet nebulizers (55.4%) being the most commonly used aerosol generators. These were followed by ultrasonic (23.1%) and vibrating-mesh nebulizers (21.5 %). During IMV, only in 50.1% of aerosol sessions (460 out of 918) was an aerosol generator placed at the optimum position (15–30 cm away from the Y-junction).

Conclusions

Aerosol therapy is frequently used in ARDS, with bronchodilators being the most common drug. The jet nebulizer is the most familiar aerosol-generating device, but only half of the aerosol sessions are at the optimum position during invasive mechanical ventilation.
急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)患者气雾剂药物治疗的实践模式:icu气雾剂研究的二次分析
背景:气溶胶药物治疗(ADT)在急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)患者中的潜在作用尚不确定。本研究的目的是确定急性呼吸窘迫综合征患者ADT的患病率和实践模式。方法对2022年11月至2023年3月期间在印度9个重症监护病房(icu)对危重患者进行的前瞻性观察性多中心队列研究进行二次分析,以了解ADT实践模式。该研究招募了新入院的成年患者(年龄18岁),他们使用人工气道并需要机械通气(有创或无创)。随访14天或至ICU出院或死亡。该二次分析收集了筛选的ARDS患者的数据,这些数据与每种气溶胶治疗相关,包括持续的呼吸支持、药物类型和气溶胶产生装置,包括持续的呼吸支持、药物类型和气溶胶产生装置。结果218例ARDS患者中53例(24.3%)发生ARDS,平均年龄(60.2±14.8)岁。入院时,患者的急性生理和慢性健康评估(APACHE II)评分为17.4±7.1分,序事性器官衰竭评估(SOFA)评分为7.7±4.0分。分别有45.3%、24.5%和30.2%的患者采用有创机械通气(IMV)、无创通气(NIV)或两者同时提供呼吸支持。ICU平均住院时间为(6.4±4.0)d。在53例ARDS患者中,51例(96.2%)在随访期间接受了1285次气溶胶治疗,随访时间为330个患者日。在所有接受气雾剂治疗的急性呼吸窘迫综合征患者中,71.4%的患者同时服用IMV, 25.7%的患者同时服用NIV。在使用单一药物的气雾剂疗程中,使用单一药物的占60.7%,使用联合药物的占39.3%。短效支气管扩张剂是主要药物,喷射雾化器是最常用的气溶胶发生器(55.4%)。其次是超声波雾化器(23.1%)和振动网雾化器(21.5%)。在IMV过程中,只有50.1%的气溶胶试验(918次试验中的460次)将气溶胶发生器放置在最佳位置(距离y型交界处15-30厘米)。结论雾化治疗是ARDS常用的治疗方法,支气管扩张剂是最常用的药物。喷射喷雾器是最常见的气溶胶产生装置,但在有创机械通气过程中,只有一半的气溶胶处于最佳位置。
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
Journal of intensive medicine
Journal of intensive medicine Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
58 days
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信