Objective:To evaluate the in-hospital outcome of moderate to severe COVID-19 patients admitted in High Dependency Unit(HDU)in relation to invasive vs.non-invasive mode of ventilation.Methods:In this study,the patients...Objective:To evaluate the in-hospital outcome of moderate to severe COVID-19 patients admitted in High Dependency Unit(HDU)in relation to invasive vs.non-invasive mode of ventilation.Methods:In this study,the patients required either non-invasive[oxygen≤10 L/min or>10 L/min through mask or nasal prongs,rebreather masks and bilevel positive airway pressure(BiPAP)]or invasive ventilation.For analysis of 30-day in hospital mortality in relation to use of different modes of oxygen,Kaplan Meier and log rank analyses were used.In the end,independent predictors of survival were determined by Cox regression analysis.Results:Invasive ventilation was required by 15.1%patients while 84.9%patients needed non-invasive ventilation.Patients with evidence of thromboembolism,high inflammatory markers and hypoxemia mainly required invasive ventilation.The 30-day in hospital mortality was 72.7%for the invasive group and 12.9%for the non-invasive group(1.8%oxygen<10 L/min,0.9%oxygen>10 L/min,3.6%rebreather mask and 4.5%BiPAP).The median time from hospital admission to outcome was 7 days for the invasive group and 18 days for the non-invasive group(P<0.05).Age,presence of co-morbidities,number of days requiring oxygen,rebreather,BiPAP and invasive ventilation were independent predictors of outcome.Conclusions:Invasive mechanical ventilation is associated with adverse outcomes possibly due to ventilator associated lung injury.Thus,protective non-invasive ventilation remains the necessary and safe treatment for severely hypoxic COVID-19 patients.展开更多
OBJECTIVE: To compare the influence of cardiac-pulmonary function on clinical acute respiratory failure patients using Proportional assist ventilation (PAV), Pressure support ventilation (PSV) and intermittent positiv...OBJECTIVE: To compare the influence of cardiac-pulmonary function on clinical acute respiratory failure patients using Proportional assist ventilation (PAV), Pressure support ventilation (PSV) and intermittent positive pressure ventilation (IPPV). Here, we also describe some our experience with the clinical use of PAV. METHODS: Using the IPPV mode in ten acute respiratory failure patients, calculate Elastance (Ers) and Resistance (Rrs), then change to PSV, set inspiratory positive airway pressure (IPAP) according to IPPV, so that tidal volume (V(T)) is the same as that of IPPV. We then changed the mode into PAV and set the assist ratio according to PSV, so that V(T) and Ppeak were the same as that of PSV. Then we observed the changes of respiratory mechanics, blood gas levels and hemodynamics during ventilation. RESULTS: Compared with PSV and IPPV, peak pressure (Ppeak) of PAV was markedly lower while V(T) was similar; work of breathing of patient (WOBp), and work of breathing of ventilation (WOBv) were also lower; center vein pressure (CVP) and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) of PAV were markedly lower than that of IPPV while V(T) were similar. Compared with PSV, V(T), mean blood pressure (mBP) and cardiac output (CO) of PAV were higher. Mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) and WOBp of PAV were lower while Ppeak was similar; the differences in WOBp were notable. CONCLUSIONS: For clinical acute respiratory failure patients, compared with PSV and IPPV, PAV has lower airway pressure, less WOBp and less influence on hemodynamics.展开更多
文摘Objective:To evaluate the in-hospital outcome of moderate to severe COVID-19 patients admitted in High Dependency Unit(HDU)in relation to invasive vs.non-invasive mode of ventilation.Methods:In this study,the patients required either non-invasive[oxygen≤10 L/min or>10 L/min through mask or nasal prongs,rebreather masks and bilevel positive airway pressure(BiPAP)]or invasive ventilation.For analysis of 30-day in hospital mortality in relation to use of different modes of oxygen,Kaplan Meier and log rank analyses were used.In the end,independent predictors of survival were determined by Cox regression analysis.Results:Invasive ventilation was required by 15.1%patients while 84.9%patients needed non-invasive ventilation.Patients with evidence of thromboembolism,high inflammatory markers and hypoxemia mainly required invasive ventilation.The 30-day in hospital mortality was 72.7%for the invasive group and 12.9%for the non-invasive group(1.8%oxygen<10 L/min,0.9%oxygen>10 L/min,3.6%rebreather mask and 4.5%BiPAP).The median time from hospital admission to outcome was 7 days for the invasive group and 18 days for the non-invasive group(P<0.05).Age,presence of co-morbidities,number of days requiring oxygen,rebreather,BiPAP and invasive ventilation were independent predictors of outcome.Conclusions:Invasive mechanical ventilation is associated with adverse outcomes possibly due to ventilator associated lung injury.Thus,protective non-invasive ventilation remains the necessary and safe treatment for severely hypoxic COVID-19 patients.
文摘OBJECTIVE: To compare the influence of cardiac-pulmonary function on clinical acute respiratory failure patients using Proportional assist ventilation (PAV), Pressure support ventilation (PSV) and intermittent positive pressure ventilation (IPPV). Here, we also describe some our experience with the clinical use of PAV. METHODS: Using the IPPV mode in ten acute respiratory failure patients, calculate Elastance (Ers) and Resistance (Rrs), then change to PSV, set inspiratory positive airway pressure (IPAP) according to IPPV, so that tidal volume (V(T)) is the same as that of IPPV. We then changed the mode into PAV and set the assist ratio according to PSV, so that V(T) and Ppeak were the same as that of PSV. Then we observed the changes of respiratory mechanics, blood gas levels and hemodynamics during ventilation. RESULTS: Compared with PSV and IPPV, peak pressure (Ppeak) of PAV was markedly lower while V(T) was similar; work of breathing of patient (WOBp), and work of breathing of ventilation (WOBv) were also lower; center vein pressure (CVP) and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) of PAV were markedly lower than that of IPPV while V(T) were similar. Compared with PSV, V(T), mean blood pressure (mBP) and cardiac output (CO) of PAV were higher. Mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) and WOBp of PAV were lower while Ppeak was similar; the differences in WOBp were notable. CONCLUSIONS: For clinical acute respiratory failure patients, compared with PSV and IPPV, PAV has lower airway pressure, less WOBp and less influence on hemodynamics.
