Hemodynamic response to positive end-expiratory pressure and prone position in COVID-19 ARDS
- PMID: 35038571
- PMCID: PMC8759096
- DOI: 10.1016/j.resp.2022.103844
Hemodynamic response to positive end-expiratory pressure and prone position in COVID-19 ARDS
Abstract
Background: Use of high positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and prone positioning is common in patients with COVID-19-induced acute respiratory failure. Few data clarify the hemodynamic effects of these interventions in this specific condition. We performed a physiologic study to assess the hemodynamic effects of PEEP and prone position during COVID-19 respiratory failure.
Methods: Nine adult patients mechanically ventilated due to COVID-19 infection and fulfilling moderate-to-severe ARDS criteria were studied. Respiratory mechanics, gas exchange, cardiac output, oxygen consumption, systemic and pulmonary pressures were recorded through pulmonary arterial catheterization at PEEP of 15 and 5 cmH2O, and after prone positioning. Recruitability was assessed through the recruitment-to-inflation ratio.
Results: High PEEP improved PaO2/FiO2 ratio in all patients (p = 0.004), and significantly decreased pulmonary shunt fraction (p = 0.012), regardless of lung recruitability. PEEP-induced increases in PaO2/FiO2 changes were strictly correlated with shunt fraction reduction (rho=-0.82, p = 0.01). From low to high PEEP, cardiac output decreased by 18 % (p = 0.05) and central venous pressure increased by 17 % (p = 0.015). As compared to supine position with low PEEP, prone positioning significantly decreased pulmonary shunt fraction (p = 0.03), increased PaO2/FiO2 (p = 0.03) and mixed venous oxygen saturation (p = 0.016), without affecting cardiac output. PaO2/FiO2 was improved by prone position also when compared to high PEEP (p = 0.03).
Conclusions: In patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS due to COVID-19, PEEP and prone position improve arterial oxygenation. Changes in cardiac output contribute to the effects of PEEP but not of prone position, which appears the most effective intervention to improve oxygenation with no hemodynamic side effects.
Keywords: ARDS; COVID-19; Cardiac output; Hemodynamic monitoring; PEEP; Prone position; Pulmonary artery catheter; Pulmonary shunt; SARS-CoV-2.
Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
All authors declare that no conflict of interests exists regarding the material discussed in the manuscript.
Figures
References
-
- Abou-Arab O., Haye G., Beyls C., Huette P., Roger P.-A., Guilbart M., Bernasinski M., Besserve P., Trojette F., Dupont H., Jounieaux V., Mahjoub Y. Hypoxemia and prone position in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients: a prospective cohort study. Can. J. Anaesth. 2021;68:262–263. doi: 10.1007/s12630-020-01844-9. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Ackermann M., Verleden S.E., Kuehnel M., Haverich A., Welte T., Laenger F., Vanstapel A., Werlein C., Stark H., Tzankov A., Li W.W., Li V.W., Mentzer S.J., Jonigk D. Pulmonary vascular endothelialitis, thrombosis, and angiogenesis in Covid-19. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020;383:120–128. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2015432. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Caravita S., Baratto C., Di Marco F., Calabrese A., Balestrieri G., Russo F., Faini A., Soranna D., Perego G.B., Badano L.P., Grazioli L., Lorini F.L., Parati G., Senni M. Haemodynamic characteristics of COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome requiring mechanical ventilation. An invasive assessment using right heart catheterization. Eur. J. Heart Fail. 2020;22:2228–2237. doi: 10.1002/ejhf.2058. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Chen L., Del Sorbo L., Grieco D.L., Junhasavasdikul D., Rittayamai N., Soliman I., Sklar M.C., Rauseo M., Ferguson N.D., Fan E., Richard J.C.M.C.M., Brochard L. Potential for lung recruitment estimated by the recruitment-to-inflation ratio in acute respiratory distress syndrome. A clinical trial. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2020;201:178–187. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201902-0334OC. - DOI - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources