COVID-19与非COVID-19相关急性呼吸窘迫综合征的临床结局和肺力学特征:两项主要随机试验的倾向评分分析

Bruno Martins Tomazini, Eduardo Leite Vieira Costa, Bruno Adler Maccagnan Pinheiro Besen, Fernando Godinho Zampieri, Carlos Roberto Ribeiro de Carvalho, Eliana Bernardete Caser, Vicente Cés de Souza-Dantas, Emerson Boschi, Renata Rego Lins Fumis, Meton Soares de Alencar Filho, Israel Silva Maia, Wilson de Oliveira Filho, Viviane Cordeiro Veiga, Alvaro Avezum, Renato Delascio Lopes, Flávia Ribeiro Machado, Otávio Berwanger, Regis Goulart Rosa, Alexandre Biasi Cavalcanti, Luciano César Pontes de Azevedo
{"title":"COVID-19与非COVID-19相关急性呼吸窘迫综合征的临床结局和肺力学特征:两项主要随机试验的倾向评分分析","authors":"Bruno Martins Tomazini,&nbsp;Eduardo Leite Vieira Costa,&nbsp;Bruno Adler Maccagnan Pinheiro Besen,&nbsp;Fernando Godinho Zampieri,&nbsp;Carlos Roberto Ribeiro de Carvalho,&nbsp;Eliana Bernardete Caser,&nbsp;Vicente Cés de Souza-Dantas,&nbsp;Emerson Boschi,&nbsp;Renata Rego Lins Fumis,&nbsp;Meton Soares de Alencar Filho,&nbsp;Israel Silva Maia,&nbsp;Wilson de Oliveira Filho,&nbsp;Viviane Cordeiro Veiga,&nbsp;Alvaro Avezum,&nbsp;Renato Delascio Lopes,&nbsp;Flávia Ribeiro Machado,&nbsp;Otávio Berwanger,&nbsp;Regis Goulart Rosa,&nbsp;Alexandre Biasi Cavalcanti,&nbsp;Luciano César Pontes de Azevedo","doi":"10.5935/0103-507X.20220040-pt","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the lung mechanics and outcomes between COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome and non-COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We combined data from two randomized trials in acute respiratory distress syndrome, one including only COVID-19 patients and the other including only patients without COVID-19, to determine whether COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome is associated with higher 28-day mortality than non-COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome and to examine the differences in lung mechanics between these two types of acute respiratory distress syndrome.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 299 patients with COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome and 1,010 patients with non-COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome were included in the main analysis. The results showed that non-COVID-19 patients used higher positive end-expiratory pressure (12.5cmH2O; SD 3.2 versus 11.7cmH2O SD 2.8; p < 0.001), were ventilated with lower tidal volumes (5.8mL/kg; SD 1.0 versus 6.5mL/kg; SD 1.2; p < 0.001) and had lower static respiratory compliance adjusted for ideal body weight (0.5mL/cmH2O/kg; SD 0.3 versus 0.6mL/cmH2O/kg; SD 0.3; p = 0.01). There was no difference between groups in 28-day mortality (52.3% versus 58.9%; p = 0.52) or mechanical ventilation duration in the first 28 days among survivors (13 [IQR 5 - 22] versus 12 [IQR 6 - 26], p = 0.46).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This analysis showed that patients with non-COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome have different lung mechanics but similar outcomes to COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome patients. After propensity score matching, there was no difference in lung mechanics or outcomes between groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":53519,"journal":{"name":"Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva","volume":"34 3","pages":"335-341"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9749099/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical outcomes and lung mechanics characteristics between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome: a propensity score analysis of two major randomized trials.\",\"authors\":\"Bruno Martins Tomazini,&nbsp;Eduardo Leite Vieira Costa,&nbsp;Bruno Adler Maccagnan Pinheiro Besen,&nbsp;Fernando Godinho Zampieri,&nbsp;Carlos Roberto Ribeiro de Carvalho,&nbsp;Eliana Bernardete Caser,&nbsp;Vicente Cés de Souza-Dantas,&nbsp;Emerson Boschi,&nbsp;Renata Rego Lins Fumis,&nbsp;Meton Soares de Alencar Filho,&nbsp;Israel Silva Maia,&nbsp;Wilson de Oliveira Filho,&nbsp;Viviane Cordeiro Veiga,&nbsp;Alvaro Avezum,&nbsp;Renato Delascio Lopes,&nbsp;Flávia Ribeiro Machado,&nbsp;Otávio Berwanger,&nbsp;Regis Goulart Rosa,&nbsp;Alexandre Biasi Cavalcanti,&nbsp;Luciano César Pontes de Azevedo\",\"doi\":\"10.5935/0103-507X.20220040-pt\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the lung mechanics and outcomes between COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome and non-COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We combined data from two randomized trials in acute respiratory distress syndrome, one including only COVID-19 patients and the other including only patients without COVID-19, to determine whether COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome is associated with higher 28-day mortality than non-COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome and to examine the differences in lung mechanics between these two types of acute respiratory distress syndrome.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 299 patients with COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome and 1,010 patients with non-COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome were included in the main analysis. The results showed that non-COVID-19 patients used higher positive end-expiratory pressure (12.5cmH2O; SD 3.2 versus 11.7cmH2O SD 2.8; p < 0.001), were ventilated with lower tidal volumes (5.8mL/kg; SD 1.0 versus 6.5mL/kg; SD 1.2; p < 0.001) and had lower static respiratory compliance adjusted for ideal body weight (0.5mL/cmH2O/kg; SD 0.3 versus 0.6mL/cmH2O/kg; SD 0.3; p = 0.01). There was no difference between groups in 28-day mortality (52.3% versus 58.9%; p = 0.52) or mechanical ventilation duration in the first 28 days among survivors (13 [IQR 5 - 22] versus 12 [IQR 6 - 26], p = 0.46).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This analysis showed that patients with non-COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome have different lung mechanics but similar outcomes to COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome patients. After propensity score matching, there was no difference in lung mechanics or outcomes between groups.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":53519,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva\",\"volume\":\"34 3\",\"pages\":\"335-341\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9749099/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5935/0103-507X.20220040-pt\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5935/0103-507X.20220040-pt","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较新冠肺炎相关急性呼吸窘迫综合征与非新冠肺炎相关急性呼吸窘迫综合征的肺力学和预后。方法:我们结合两项急性呼吸窘迫综合征随机试验的数据,一项仅纳入COVID-19患者,另一项仅纳入未纳入COVID-19的患者,以确定COVID-19相关急性呼吸窘迫综合征是否与非COVID-19急性呼吸窘迫综合征的28天死亡率相关,并检查两种类型急性呼吸窘迫综合征的肺力学差异。结果:共纳入299例新冠肺炎相关急性呼吸窘迫综合征患者和1010例非新冠肺炎相关急性呼吸窘迫综合征患者。结果显示,非covid -19患者呼气末正压较高(12.5 mh2o;SD 3.2 vs 11.7cmH2O SD 2.8;p < 0.001),潮气量较低(5.8mL/kg;SD 1.0 vs 6.5mL/kg;SD 1.2;p < 0.001),经理想体重调整后的静态呼吸顺应性较低(0.5mL/cmH2O/kg;SD 0.3 vs . 0.6mL/cmH2O/kg;SD 0.3;P = 0.01)。两组28天死亡率无差异(52.3% vs 58.9%;p = 0.52)或前28天的机械通气时间(13 [IQR 5 - 22]对12 [IQR 6 - 26], p = 0.46)。结论:本分析显示,非covid -19相关急性呼吸窘迫综合征患者与covid -19相关急性呼吸窘迫综合征患者肺力学不同,但结局相似。在倾向评分匹配后,两组之间的肺力学或结果没有差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Clinical outcomes and lung mechanics characteristics between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome: a propensity score analysis of two major randomized trials.

Objective: To compare the lung mechanics and outcomes between COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome and non-COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Methods: We combined data from two randomized trials in acute respiratory distress syndrome, one including only COVID-19 patients and the other including only patients without COVID-19, to determine whether COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome is associated with higher 28-day mortality than non-COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome and to examine the differences in lung mechanics between these two types of acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Results: A total of 299 patients with COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome and 1,010 patients with non-COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome were included in the main analysis. The results showed that non-COVID-19 patients used higher positive end-expiratory pressure (12.5cmH2O; SD 3.2 versus 11.7cmH2O SD 2.8; p < 0.001), were ventilated with lower tidal volumes (5.8mL/kg; SD 1.0 versus 6.5mL/kg; SD 1.2; p < 0.001) and had lower static respiratory compliance adjusted for ideal body weight (0.5mL/cmH2O/kg; SD 0.3 versus 0.6mL/cmH2O/kg; SD 0.3; p = 0.01). There was no difference between groups in 28-day mortality (52.3% versus 58.9%; p = 0.52) or mechanical ventilation duration in the first 28 days among survivors (13 [IQR 5 - 22] versus 12 [IQR 6 - 26], p = 0.46).

Conclusion: This analysis showed that patients with non-COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome have different lung mechanics but similar outcomes to COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome patients. After propensity score matching, there was no difference in lung mechanics or outcomes between groups.

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
Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva
Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva Medicine-Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
自引率
0.00%
发文量
114
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Patient-level costs of central line-associated bloodstream infections caused by multidrug-resistant microorganisms in a public intensive care unit in Brazil: a retrospective cohort study Critical COVID-19 and neurological dysfunction - a direct comparative analysis between SARS-CoV-2 and other infectious pathogens. Reply to: Epistaxis as a complication of high-flow nasal cannula therapy in adults. Robust, maintainable, emergency invasive mechanical ventilator. Erratum.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1