在接受加湿高流量鼻吸氧的COVID-19患者中使用吸入环氧前列醇与进行性呼吸衰竭有关

Andrew P. Michelson MD , Patrick G. Lyons MD, MSCI , Nguyet M. Nguyen MD , Daniel Reynolds MD , Rachel McDonald MD , Colleen A. McEvoy MD , Vladimir Despotovic MD , Steven L. Brody MD , Marin H. Kollef MD , Bryan D. Kraft MD
{"title":"在接受加湿高流量鼻吸氧的COVID-19患者中使用吸入环氧前列醇与进行性呼吸衰竭有关","authors":"Andrew P. Michelson MD ,&nbsp;Patrick G. Lyons MD, MSCI ,&nbsp;Nguyet M. Nguyen MD ,&nbsp;Daniel Reynolds MD ,&nbsp;Rachel McDonald MD ,&nbsp;Colleen A. McEvoy MD ,&nbsp;Vladimir Despotovic MD ,&nbsp;Steven L. Brody MD ,&nbsp;Marin H. Kollef MD ,&nbsp;Bryan D. Kraft MD","doi":"10.1016/j.chstcc.2023.100019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The clinical benefit of using inhaled epoprostenol (iEpo) through a humidified high-flow nasal cannula (HHFNC) remains unknown for patients with COVID-19.</p></div><div><h3>Research Question</h3><p>Can iEpo prevent respiratory deterioration for patients with positive SARS-CoV-2 findings receiving HHFNC?</p></div><div><h3>Study Design and Methods</h3><p>This multicenter retrospective cohort analysis included patients aged 18 years or older with COVID-19 pneumonia who required HHFNC treatment. Patients who received iEpo were propensity score matched to patients who did not receive iEpo. The primary outcome was time to mechanical ventilation or death without mechanical ventilation and was assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard ratios. The effects of residual confounding were assessed using a multilevel analysis, and a secondary analysis adjusted for outcome propensity also was performed in a multivariable model that included the entire (unmatched) patient cohort.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Among 954 patients with positive SARS-CoV-2 findings receiving HHFNC therapy, 133 patients (13.9%) received iEpo. After propensity score matching, the median number of days until the composite outcome was similar between treatment groups (iEpo: 5.0 days [interquartile range, 2.0-10.0 days] vs no-iEpo: 6.5 days [interquartile range, 2.0-11.0 days]; <em>P</em> = .26), but patients who received iEpo were more likely to meet the composite outcome in the propensity score-matched, multilevel, and multivariable unmatched analyses (hazard ratio, 2.08 [95% CI, 1.73-2.50]; OR, 4.72 [95% CI, 3.01-7.41]; and OR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.23-1.49]; respectively).</p></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><p>In patients with COVID-19 receiving HHFNC therapy, use of iEpo was associated with the need for invasive mechanical ventilation.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93934,"journal":{"name":"CHEST critical care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949788423000199/pdfft?md5=4a6e14a81b1af862f339e0ffca12f864&pid=1-s2.0-S2949788423000199-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Use of Inhaled Epoprostenol in Patients With COVID-19 Receiving Humidified, High-Flow Nasal Oxygen Is Associated With Progressive Respiratory Failure\",\"authors\":\"Andrew P. Michelson MD ,&nbsp;Patrick G. Lyons MD, MSCI ,&nbsp;Nguyet M. Nguyen MD ,&nbsp;Daniel Reynolds MD ,&nbsp;Rachel McDonald MD ,&nbsp;Colleen A. McEvoy MD ,&nbsp;Vladimir Despotovic MD ,&nbsp;Steven L. Brody MD ,&nbsp;Marin H. Kollef MD ,&nbsp;Bryan D. Kraft MD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.chstcc.2023.100019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The clinical benefit of using inhaled epoprostenol (iEpo) through a humidified high-flow nasal cannula (HHFNC) remains unknown for patients with COVID-19.</p></div><div><h3>Research Question</h3><p>Can iEpo prevent respiratory deterioration for patients with positive SARS-CoV-2 findings receiving HHFNC?</p></div><div><h3>Study Design and Methods</h3><p>This multicenter retrospective cohort analysis included patients aged 18 years or older with COVID-19 pneumonia who required HHFNC treatment. Patients who received iEpo were propensity score matched to patients who did not receive iEpo. The primary outcome was time to mechanical ventilation or death without mechanical ventilation and was assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard ratios. The effects of residual confounding were assessed using a multilevel analysis, and a secondary analysis adjusted for outcome propensity also was performed in a multivariable model that included the entire (unmatched) patient cohort.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Among 954 patients with positive SARS-CoV-2 findings receiving HHFNC therapy, 133 patients (13.9%) received iEpo. After propensity score matching, the median number of days until the composite outcome was similar between treatment groups (iEpo: 5.0 days [interquartile range, 2.0-10.0 days] vs no-iEpo: 6.5 days [interquartile range, 2.0-11.0 days]; <em>P</em> = .26), but patients who received iEpo were more likely to meet the composite outcome in the propensity score-matched, multilevel, and multivariable unmatched analyses (hazard ratio, 2.08 [95% CI, 1.73-2.50]; OR, 4.72 [95% CI, 3.01-7.41]; and OR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.23-1.49]; respectively).</p></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><p>In patients with COVID-19 receiving HHFNC therapy, use of iEpo was associated with the need for invasive mechanical ventilation.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93934,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CHEST critical care\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949788423000199/pdfft?md5=4a6e14a81b1af862f339e0ffca12f864&pid=1-s2.0-S2949788423000199-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CHEST critical care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949788423000199\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CHEST critical care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949788423000199","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:对于COVID-19患者,通过湿化高流量鼻插管(HHFNC)吸入环氧前列醇(iEpo)的临床益处尚不清楚。研究问题:对于接受HHFNC的SARS-CoV-2阳性患者,iEpo能否预防呼吸系统恶化?研究设计和方法本多中心回顾性队列分析纳入了18岁及以上需要hfnc治疗的COVID-19肺炎患者。接受iEpo治疗的患者倾向评分与未接受iEpo治疗的患者相匹配。主要终点为机械通气时间或无机械通气死亡,并采用Kaplan-Meier曲线和Cox比例风险比进行评估。使用多水平分析评估残留混杂的影响,并在包括整个(未匹配的)患者队列的多变量模型中进行了调整结果倾向的二次分析。结果在接受HHFNC治疗的954例SARS-CoV-2阳性患者中,133例(13.9%)接受了iEpo治疗。倾向评分匹配后,两组患者达到综合结局的中位天数相似(iEpo: 5.0天[四分位数范围,2.0-10.0天]vs no-iEpo: 6.5天[四分位数范围,2.0-11.0天];P = 0.26),但在倾向评分匹配、多水平和多变量不匹配分析中,接受iEpo治疗的患者更有可能达到复合结局(风险比,2.08 [95% CI, 1.73-2.50];Or为4.72 [95% ci, 3.01-7.41];OR为1.35 [95% CI, 1.23-1.49];分别)。在接受hfnc治疗的COVID-19患者中,iEpo的使用与有创机械通气的需求相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Use of Inhaled Epoprostenol in Patients With COVID-19 Receiving Humidified, High-Flow Nasal Oxygen Is Associated With Progressive Respiratory Failure

Background

The clinical benefit of using inhaled epoprostenol (iEpo) through a humidified high-flow nasal cannula (HHFNC) remains unknown for patients with COVID-19.

Research Question

Can iEpo prevent respiratory deterioration for patients with positive SARS-CoV-2 findings receiving HHFNC?

Study Design and Methods

This multicenter retrospective cohort analysis included patients aged 18 years or older with COVID-19 pneumonia who required HHFNC treatment. Patients who received iEpo were propensity score matched to patients who did not receive iEpo. The primary outcome was time to mechanical ventilation or death without mechanical ventilation and was assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard ratios. The effects of residual confounding were assessed using a multilevel analysis, and a secondary analysis adjusted for outcome propensity also was performed in a multivariable model that included the entire (unmatched) patient cohort.

Results

Among 954 patients with positive SARS-CoV-2 findings receiving HHFNC therapy, 133 patients (13.9%) received iEpo. After propensity score matching, the median number of days until the composite outcome was similar between treatment groups (iEpo: 5.0 days [interquartile range, 2.0-10.0 days] vs no-iEpo: 6.5 days [interquartile range, 2.0-11.0 days]; P = .26), but patients who received iEpo were more likely to meet the composite outcome in the propensity score-matched, multilevel, and multivariable unmatched analyses (hazard ratio, 2.08 [95% CI, 1.73-2.50]; OR, 4.72 [95% CI, 3.01-7.41]; and OR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.23-1.49]; respectively).

Interpretation

In patients with COVID-19 receiving HHFNC therapy, use of iEpo was associated with the need for invasive mechanical ventilation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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