{"title":"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","authors":"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","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 >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":"{\"title\":\"Practice pattern of aerosol drug therapy in ARDS patients: A secondary analysis of the Aero-in-ICU study\",\"authors\":\"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\",\"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 >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}","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}
Practice pattern of aerosol drug therapy in ARDS patients: A secondary analysis of the Aero-in-ICU study
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.