|
| |
 |
|
| ORIGINAL ARTICLE |
|
| Year : 2019 | Volume
: 9
| Issue : 4 | Page : 182-186 |
|
Prone ventilation in H1N1 virus-associated severe acute respiratory distress syndrome: A case series
Jyoti Narayan Sahoo1, Mohan Gurjar2, Krantimaya Mohanty1, Kalpana Majhi1, G Sradhanjali1
1 Department of Critical Care Medicine, Sunshine Hospital, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
2 Department of Critical Care Medicine, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India
| Date of Submission | 10-Sep-2018 |
| Date of Decision | 10-Jul-2019 |
| Date of Acceptance | 21-Oct-2019 |
| Date of Web Publication | 11-Dec-2019 |
Correspondence Address:
Dr. Jyoti Narayan Sahoo
Department of Critical Care Medicine, Sunshine Hospital, Bhubaneswar, Odisha
India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/IJCIIS.IJCIIS_62_18
 Abstract | | |
Background: Management of H1N1 viral infection-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has primarily been focused on lung protective ventilation strategies, despite that mortality remains high (up to 45%). Other measures to improve survival are prone position ventilation (PPV) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. There is scarcity of literature on the use of prone ventilation in H1N1-associated ARDS patients.
Methods: In this retrospective study, all adult patients admitted to medical intensive care unit (ICU) with H1N1 viral pneumonia having severe ARDS and requiring prone ventilation as a rescue therapy for severe hypoxemia were reviewed. The patients were considered to turn prone if PaO2/FiO2ratio was <100 cmH2O and PaCO2was >45 cmH2O; if no progressive improvement was seen in PaO2/FiO2over a period of 4 h, then patients were considered to turn back to supine. Measurements were obtained in supine (baseline) and PPV, after 30–60 min and then 4–6 hourly.
Results: Eleven adult patients with severe ARDS were ventilated in prone position. Their age range was 26–59 years. The worst PaO2/FiO2ratio range on the day of invasive ventilation was 48–100 (median 79). A total of 39 PPV sessions were done, with a range of 1–8 prone sessions per patient (median three sessions). Out of the 39 PPV sessions, PaO2/FiO2ratio and PaCO2responder were 38 (97.4%) and 27 (69.2%) sessions, respectively. The median ICU stay and mechanical ventilation days were 15 (range: 3–26) and 12 (range: 2–22) days, respectively. The common complication observed due to PPV was pressure ulcer. At ICU discharge, all except two patients survived.
Conclusion: PPV improves oxygenation when started early with adequate duration and should be considered in all severe ARDS cases secondary to H1N1 viral infection.
Keywords: Acute respiratory distress syndrome, H1N1 viral infection, prone ventilation
How to cite this article:
Sahoo JN, Gurjar M, Mohanty K, Majhi K, Sradhanjali G. Prone ventilation in H1N1 virus-associated severe acute respiratory distress syndrome: A case series. Int J Crit Illn Inj Sci 2019;9:182-6 |
How to cite this URL:
Sahoo JN, Gurjar M, Mohanty K, Majhi K, Sradhanjali G. Prone ventilation in H1N1 virus-associated severe acute respiratory distress syndrome: A case series. Int J Crit Illn Inj Sci [serial online] 2019 [cited 2023 Mar 22];9:182-6. Available from: https://www.ijciis.org/text.asp?2019/9/4/182/272774 |
| Introduction | |  |
Post pandemic 2009 H1N1 viral infection, multiple small epidemic outbreaks have been reported worldwide.[1] Mortality up to 45% among patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) has been reported in a recent epidemic.[2],[3] The main cause of death in patients with pneumonia caused by H1N1 viral infection is multiorgan failure secondary to hypoxemia because of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and secondary bacterial infection.[4],[5] As with other causes of ARDS, management of H1N1 viral infection ARDS is focused on lung protective ventilation (LPV) strategies, but despite that mortality remains high.[6] Other measures to improve survival include prone position ventilation (PPV) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO); although enough evidences showed that PPV reduces mortality (16%) compared to supine position ventilation (32.8%),[2],[7],[8] there are underutilization of this strategy, which is found in recent trials.[5],[9] In addition, there is scarcity of literature on the use of prone ventilation in H1N1 ARDS patients.[10],[11],[12] We studied the effect of prone ventilation in severe ARDS patients admitted with the diagnosis of H1N1 during an epidemic in the winter months of 2014–2015 in a southern state of India.
| Methods | | |
This study was conducted at a tertiary health-care center in southern part of India. All patients admitted to medical ICU with H1N1 viral pneumonia having severe ARDS requiring prone ventilation as a rescue therapy for severe hypoxemia were reviewed prospectively. Polymerase chain reaction-confirmed H1N1 was included in this series. ARDS was defined as per the Berlin definition.[13] Patients with cardiogenic pulmonary edema and spinal instability were excluded from the study. All the included patients were studied while sedated with fentanyl and midazolam and paralyzed with atracurium. The ventilatory settings were set as per the treating physician. Positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and FiO2 were adjusted according to the PEEP-FiO2 table of ARDSnet trial.[6] Measurements were obtained in supine (baseline) and PPV, after 30–60 min and then 4–6 hourly. The patients were considered to turn prone if PaO2/FiO2 ratio was <100 cmH2O and PaCO2 was >45 cmH2O. Patients were classified as nonresponders if the PaO2/FiO2 ratio does not increase by >20% and PaCO2 decrease by 6 cmH2O. In PPV, if no progressive improvement was seen in PaO2/FiO2 and PaCO2 over a period of 4 h, then the patients were considered to turn supine. In this descriptive study, parametric and nonparametric data were presented as means (standard deviation) and medians, respectively.
| Results | | |
Between September 1, 2014, and March 15, 2015, 93 patients were treated for H1N1 viral pneumonia. Of these, 11 adult patients developed severe ARDS which did not responded to lung-protective ventilator strategies and were ventilated in prone position [Table 1]. Their age range was 26–59 years (median: 48), with four patients under the age of 40 years. Seven patients were female, including one postpartum. All presented with fever, cough, and dyspnea for 4–12 days. The number of days from symptom onset to invasive ventilation ranged from 7 to 12 days (median: 8). Five patients had comorbid illness, the common being morbid obesity and diabetes mellitus. On the day of ICU admission, the median Acute Physiological and Chronic Health Evaluation-II and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores were 20 (range: 16–27) and 7 (range: 5–12), respectively. Noninvasive ventilation trial was given in eight patients before invasive ventilation, out of which two required invasive ventilation within 12 h and the rest in 48 h. The worst PaO2/FiO2 ratio range on the day of invasive ventilation was 48–100 (median: 79). Out of 11 patients, PPV was started within 24 h in 8 patients and within 48 h in 3 patients. Preprone, ventilator, and blood gas parameters are summarized in [Table 2]; the response of PaO2/FiO2 ratio to prone ventilation is shown in [Figure 1]. Four patients had cardiac dysfunction, with one having viral myocarditis (global hypokinesia ejection fraction of 23%), and three patients had pulmonary arterial hypertension with acute right heart failure. A total of 39 PPV sessions were done, with a range of 1–8 prone sessions per patient (median: 3). A total of 580 h of prone ventilation was done with an average of 14 h 52 min/session (range: 8–24) of prone ventilation. Out of the 39 PPV sessions, PaO2/FiO2 ratio and PaCO2 responder were 38 (97.4%) and 27 (69.2%) sessions, respectively. | Table 2: Ventilator parameters and blood gases before the first prone session
Click here to view |
 | Figure 1: Changes in PaO2/FiO2ratio in response to prone position ventilation session. Supine PaO2/FiO2:Before prone position; prone PaO2/FiO2: End of prone position ventilation
Click here to view |
The median ICU stay and mechanical ventilation days were 15 (range: 3–26) and 12 (range: 2–22) days, respectively. In five patients, tracheal aspirate showed bacterial growth (3 – Acinetobacter baumannii, 1 – Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and 1 – Klebsiella pneumoniae) and all survived. Apart from respiratory failure, two patients required vasopressor therapy and two had cardiovascular and renal failure, of which both patients died. Seven patients were tracheotomized. The median duration of spontaneous breathing trial from the day of prone ventilation was 8 (range: 5-16) days. The complications were observed as pressure ulcer in four patients; while back pain and critical illness neuromyopathy in one each patient. Two patients died due to shock and multiorgan failure.
| Discussion | | |
In this single-center, retrospective observational study, all H1N1 infection-associated severe ARDS patients showed improvement in PaO2/FiO2 ratio (>20%) after the first prone session, with many of them undergoing multiple prone sessions also. There are multiple factors which may account for the benefit in PPV such as reduction in dependent atelectasis and pleural pressure gradient,[14] alveolar recruitment,[15] homogeneous ventilation,[16] and relief of the compressive segment of the lung by the heart[17],[18] and abdomen.[19] All these factors cause reduction in ventilation and perfusion mismatch, intrapulmonary shunt, and ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI). These all lead to improved oxygenation and decreased PaCO2. The oxygenation and PaCO2 response to PPV are variable and depend on the type of lung injury, percentage of recruitable lung tissue,[20] and duration of PPV.[4],[21] Patients with diffuse lung injury have less nonaerated lung tissue and respond to prone ventilation by increase in oxygenation without decrease in PaCO2, whereas lobar lung injury has significant percentage of nonaerated recruitable lung tissue and shows marked decrease in PaCO2 along with improvement in oxygenation.[15] Alveolar recruitment in PPV is time dependent, with different nonaerated lung units having different plateaus for complete alveolar recruitment.[22]
Till 2013, a large number of randomized controlled trials were published which did not show any mortality benefit of PPV in ARDS patients, although improvement of oxygenation was seen.[21],[23],[24],[25],[26],[27],[28] Many reasons have been put forth for nonimprovement in mortality in earlier studies such as lack of power in the study, too short PPV, heterogeneous patient population, or improved oxygenation does not translate to decrease mortality as multiorgan failure being the most common cause of mortality followed by hypoxemia in ALI or ARDS patients.[29],[30]
We studied the effect of prone ventilation in severe ARDS due to H1N1, with early initiation, prolonged duration, and multiple sessions. Our study replicated the findings of Guérin et al. regarding the beneficial effect of PPV in severe ARDS when started early with prolonged duration.[8] Worldwide, ARDS is associated with substantial mortality, with unadjusted ICU and hospital mortality of 35.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 33.3%–37.2%) and 40.0% (95% CI, 38.1%–42.1%), respectively.[5] H1N1 viral infection ARDS causes 36%–38% mortality in accordance with other causes of ARDS.[3],[31]
Overall, worldwide, PPV is used in 7.9% (95% CI, 6.8–9) in all patients and 16.3% (95% CI 13.7–19.2) in severe ARDS patients.[5] As with other causes of ARDS, management of H1N1 viral infection ARDS is focused on LPV strategies, and PPV is a very safe and effective way of achieving improved oxygenation and preventing VILI.[12],[32] In recent published trials worldwide on severe H1N1 viral ARDS, only 20%, 45%, 34%, 28%, and 47% of patients were subjected to prone position ventilated before starting ECMO in Australian, French, UK, Italian, and German studies, respectively.[2],[3],[7],[31],[33]
Our study differs from that of previous with regard to the optimal duration of PPV. Earlier studies with prone ventilation used short duration PPV (8 h) with no mortality benefit,[23],[24] but later studies which used longer duration PPV showed mortality benefit when used in severe ARDS patients with high percentage of nonaerated lung unit.[8],[21] In our studies, we used variable PPV duration (average: 14 h 52 min, range: 8–24 h) and continued until we did not find any improvement in oxygenation, decrease in PaCO2, or increase in tidal volume over a period of 4 h. In the present study, according to clinician's decision, multiple prone sessions were considered till PaO2/FiO2 ratio sustained >150 in supine position. One patient had only one prone session, and later he died [Figure 1].
| Conclusion | | |
Our study demonstrates that PPV improves oxygenation when started early with adequate duration and should be considered in all severe ARDS cases secondary to H1N1 viral infection.
Financial support and sponsorship
Nil.
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
Ethical conduct of research
This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board / Ethics Committee. The authors followed applicable EQUATOR Network (http://www.equator-network.org/) guidelines during the conduct of this research project.
| References | | |
| 1. | Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Update: Novel influenza A (H1N1) virus infections – Worldwide, May 6, 2009. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2009;58:453-8.  |
| 2. | Noah MA, Peek GJ, Finney SJ, Griffiths MJ, Harrison DA, Grieve R, et al. Referral to an extracorporeal membrane oxygenation center and mortality among patients with severe 2009 influenza A (H1N1). JAMA 2011;306:1659-68. |
| 3. | Pham T, Combes A, Rozé H, Chevret S, Mercat A, Roch A, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for pandemic influenza A (H1N1)-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome: A cohort study and propensity-matched analysis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2013;187:276-85. |
| 4. | Louie JK, Jean C, Acosta M, Samuel MC, Matyas BT, Schechter R, et al. Areview of adult mortality due to 2009 pandemic (H1N1) influenza A in California. PLoS One 2011;6:e18221. |
| 5. | Bellani G, Laffey JG, Pham T, Fan E, Brochard L, Esteban A, et al. Epidemiology, patterns of care, and mortality for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome in intensive care units in 50 countries. JAMA 2016;315:788-800. |
| 6. | Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network, Brower RG, Matthay MA, Morris A, Schoenfeld D, Thompson BT, et al. Ventilation with lower tidal volumes as compared with traditional tidal volumes for acute lung injury and the acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med 2000;342:1301-8. |
| 7. | Patroniti N, Zangrillo A, Pappalardo F, Peris A, Cianchi G, Braschi A, et al. The Italian ECMO network experience during the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) pandemic: Preparation for severe respiratory emergency outbreaks. Intensive Care Med 2011;37:1447-57. |
| 8. | Guérin C, Reignier J, Richard JC, Beuret P, Gacouin A, Boulain T, et al. Prone positioning in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med 2013;368:2159-68. |
| 9. | Guérin C, Beuret P, Constantin JM, Bellani G, Garcia-Olivares P, Roca O, et al. Aprospective international observational prevalence study on prone positioning of ARDS patients: The APRONET (ARDS prone position network) study. Intensive Care Med 2018;44:22-37. |
| 10. | Lynfield R, Davey R, Dwyer DE, Losso MH, Wentworth D, Cozzi-Lepri A, et al. Outcomes of influenza A (H1N1) pdm09 virus infection: Results from two international cohort studies. PLoS One 2014;9:e101785. |
| 11. | Dominguez-Cherit G, De la Torre A, Rishu A, Pinto R, Ñamendys-Silva SA, Camacho-Ortiz A, et al. Influenza A (H1N1pdm09)-related critical illness and mortality in Mexico and Canada, 2014. Crit Care Med 2016;44:1861-70. |
| 12. | Venkategowda PM, Rao SM, Harde YR, Raut MK, Mutkule DP, Munta K, et al. Prone position and pressure control inverse ratio ventilation in H1N1 patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. Indian J Crit Care Med 2016;20:44-9. [ PUBMED] [Full text] |
| 13. | ARDS Definition Task Force, Ranieri VM, Rubenfeld GD, Thompson BT, Ferguson ND, Caldwell E, et al. Acute respiratory distress syndrome: The Berlin definition. JAMA 2012;307:2526-33. |
| 14. | Mutoh T, Guest RJ, Lamm WJ, Albert RK. Prone position alters the effect of volume overload on regional pleural pressures and improves hypoxemia in pigs in vivo. Am Rev Respir Dis 1992;146:300-6. |
| 15. | Galiatsou E, Kostanti E, Svarna E, Kitsakos A, Koulouras V, Efremidis SC, et al. Prone position augments recruitment and prevents alveolar overinflation in acute lung injury. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2006;174:187-97. |
| 16. | Vieillard-Baron A, Rabiller A, Chergui K, Peyrouset O, Page B, Beauchet A, et al. Prone position improves mechanics and alveolar ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome. Intensive Care Med 2005;31:220-6. |
| 17. | Malbouisson LM, Busch CJ, Puybasset L, Lu Q, Cluzel P, Rouby JJ. Role of the heart in the loss of aeration characterizing lower lobes in acute respiratory distress syndrome. CT scan ARDS study group. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000;161:2005-12. |
| 18. | Albert RK, Hubmayr RD. The prone position eliminates compression of the lungs by the heart. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000;161:1660-5. |
| 19. | Mure M, Glenny RW, Domino KB, Hlastala MP. Pulmonary gas exchange improves in the prone position with abdominal distension. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1998;157:1785-90. |
| 20. | Gattinoni L, Vagginelli F, Carlesso E, Taccone P, Conte V, Chiumello D, et al. Decrease in paCO2 with prone position is predictive of improved outcome in acute respiratory distress syndrome. Crit Care Med 2003;31:2727-33. |
| 21. | Mancebo J, Fernández R, Blanch L, Rialp G, Gordo F, Ferrer M, et al. Amulticenter trial of prolonged prone ventilation in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2006;173:1233-9. |
| 22. | Marini JJ, Gattinoni L. Propagation prevention: A complementary mechanism for “lung protective” ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome. Crit Care Med 2008;36:3252-8. |
| 23. | Gattinoni L, Tognoni G, Pesenti A, Taccone P, Mascheroni D, Labarta V, et al. Effect of prone positioning on the survival of patients with acute respiratory failure. N Engl J Med 2001;345:568-73. |
| 24. | Guerin C, Gaillard S, Lemasson S, Ayzac L, Girard R, Beuret P, et al. Effects of systematic prone positioning in hypoxemic acute respiratory failure: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2004;292:2379-87. |
| 25. | Voggenreiter G, Aufmkolk M, Stiletto RJ, Baacke MG, Waydhas C, Ose C, et al. Prone positioning improves oxygenation in post-traumatic lung injury – A prospective randomized trial. J Trauma 2005;59:333-41. |
| 26. | Curley MA, Hibberd PL, Fineman LD, Wypij D, Shih MC, Thompson JE, et al. Effect of prone positioning on clinical outcomes in children with acute lung injury: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2005;294:229-37. |
| 27. | Fernandez R, Trenchs X, Klamburg J, Castedo J, Serrano JM, Besso G, et al. Prone positioning in acute respiratory distress syndrome: A multicenter randomized clinical trial. Intensive Care Med 2008;34:1487-91. |
| 28. | Taccone P, Pesenti A, Latini R, Polli F, Vagginelli F, Mietto C, et al. Prone positioning in patients with moderate and severe acute respiratory distress syndrome: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2009;302:1977-84. |
| 29. | Montgomery AB, Stager MA, Carrico CJ, Hudson LD. Causes of mortality in patients with the adult respiratory distress syndrome. Am Rev Respir Dis 1985;132:485-9. |
| 30. | Abroug F, Ouanes-Besbes L, Elatrous S, Brochard L. The effect of prone positioning in acute respiratory distress syndrome or acute lung injury: A meta-analysis. Areas of uncertainty and recommendations for research. Intensive Care Med 2008;34:1002-11. |
| 31. | Weber-Carstens S, Goldmann A, Quintel M, Kalenka A, Kluge S, Peters J, et al. Extracorporeal lung support in H1N1 provoked acute respiratory failure: The experience of the German ARDS network. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2013;110:543-9. |
| 32. | Slutsky AS, Ranieri VM. Ventilator-induced lung injury. N Engl J Med 2013;369:2126-36. |
| 33. | Australia and New Zealand Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ANZ ECMO) Influenza Investigators, Davies A, Jones D, Bailey M, Beca J, Bellomo R, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for 2009 influenza A (H1N1) acute respiratory distress syndrome. JAMA 2009;302:1888-95. |
[Figure 1]
[Table 1], [Table 2]
| This article has been cited by | | 1 |
Long-term complications of prone position ventilation with relevance for acute and postacute rehabilitation: a systematic review of the literature |
|
| Nancy ELMER, Anett REIßHAUER, Katharina BREHM, Clarissa VOCKEROTH, Max E. LIEBL | | European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine. 2023; 59(1) | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 2 |
Prone Position in Mechanically Ventilated COVID-19 Patients: A Multicenter Study |
|
| Richard Vollenberg,Philipp Matern,Tobias Nowacki,Valentin Fuhrmann,Jan-Sören Padberg,Kevin Ochs,Katharina Schütte-Nütgen,Markus Strauß,Hartmut Schmidt,Phil-Robin Tepasse | | Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2021; 10(5): 1046 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 3 |
Pressure Injury Outcomes of a Prone-Positioning Protocol in Patients With COVID and ARDS |
|
| Connie Johnson,Nicholas A. Giordano,Lopa Patel,Karyn A. Book,Jennifer Mac,Janet Viscomi,April Em,Anna Westrick,Monika Koganti,Mindaline Tanpiengco,Karen Sylvester,Kari A. Mastro | | American Journal of Critical Care. 2021; : e1 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 4 |
A critical COVID-19 patient managed with timely evaluation, early prone positioning ventilation, and a multi-pronged pharmacotherapy |
|
| Mian Peng, Rongsong Li, Weiling Cao, Weiqing Li, Ming Wu, Yansi Lyu, Xi Meng, Kunmei Ji | | European Journal of Inflammation. 2021; 19: 2058739221 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | |
|
 |
|
|
|
