Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5cfd469876-ws85r Total loading time: 0.39 Render date: 2021-06-25T07:36:55.552Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true }

Prone Positioning in Non-Intubated Patients With COVID-19 Outside of the Intensive Care Unit: More Evidence Needed

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 August 2020

Alba Ripoll-Gallardo
Affiliation:
CRIMEDIM – Research Center in Emergency and Disaster Medicine, Università del Piemonte Orientale, Novara, Italy
Luca Grillenzoni
Affiliation:
Nuovo Ospedale Degli Infermi, Biella, Italy
Jordy Bollon
Affiliation:
Department of Translational Medicine, Università del Piemonte Orientale, Novara, Italy
Francesco della Corte
Affiliation:
CRIMEDIM – Research Center in Emergency and Disaster Medicine, Università del Piemonte Orientale, Novara, Italy
Francesco Barone-Adesi
Affiliation:
CRIMEDIM – Research Center in Emergency and Disaster Medicine, Università del Piemonte Orientale, Novara, Italy
Corresponding
E-mail address:
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has brought the Italian National Health System to its knees. The abnormally high influx of patients, together with the limited resources available, has forced clinicians to make unprecedented decisions and provide compassionate treatments for which little or no evidence is yet available. This is the case for the use of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation and continuous airway pressure ventilation, combined with prone position in patients with COVID-19 and acute respiratory distress syndrome treated outside of intensive care units. In our article, we comment on the evidence available, so far, and provide a brief summary of data collected at our health institution in Piedmont, Italy.

Type
Letter to the Editor
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© Society for Disaster Medicine and Public Health, Inc. 2020

Italy is a high-income country; however, the ongoing coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic turned hospitals into low-resource battlefields where the provision of the best level of care for a single patient was no longer feasible and “the best for the most” was the only possible alternative. Even though health facilities have made an unprecedented effort to expand their surge capacity, intensive care units (ICUs) have been under strain with health professionals struggling to provide appropriate care to wave after wave of critically ill patients.

Prone positioning (PP) improves oxygenation and decreases mortality in intubated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Even if, theoretically, the same benefits should apply to awake patients, the use of PP in non-intubated patients has seldom been described before the COVID-19 outbreak. Reference Ding, Wang and Ma1-Reference Valter, Christensen and Tollund4 Interestingly, as the pandemic continues its spread across the globe, the shortage of ventilators and ICU beds is driving clinicians to increasingly use PP outside of ICUs in an attempt to avoid or delay endotracheal intubation. Reference Sartini, Tresoldi and Scarpellini5,Reference Elharrar, Trigui and Dols6

Sartini et al. Reference Sartini, Tresoldi and Scarpellini5 have recently published a small case series of COVID-19-positive patients with mild-to-moderate ARDS treated with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) and PP, reporting that respiratory parameters improved after pronation. Similarly, Elharrar et al. Reference Elharrar, Trigui and Dols6 published a prospective study with 24 patients requiring oxygen supplementation where PP was well tolerated, but had a limited effect on oxygenation. Albeit highly relevant, both investigations presented an important limitation: the follow-up period in both studies was limited to 14 and 10 days, respectively. Therefore, intubation rate and outcomes could not be provided for all patients.

We hereby present data from a retrospective case series of 13 COVID-19-positive patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS treated at Nuovo Ospedale degli Infermi di Biella, a 500-bed suburban hospital in Piedmont, one of the most severely hit Italian regions. Patients received helmet continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) with 0.6 fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) and 10 CMH20 positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and were pronated in general wards if PaO2:FiO2 < 150 mmHg. Endotracheal intubation was performed in case of respiratory failure, hemodynamic instability, or multiorgan failure. PP was maintained as long as it was well tolerated. The Wilcoxon test was used to compare PaO2:FiO2 and the respiratory rate before and after PP. Analyses were performed using Stata 15 Software (Stata Corp, College Station, TX). A P-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Demographic data, coexisting chronic diseases, respiratory parameters before and after PP, laboratory values, and patient outcomes are reported in Table 1. Mean (SD) age was 66.3 years (7.7 years). Mean (SD) PaO2:FiO2 before PP was 115 (13). Our results showed an improved PaO2:FiO2 compared to baseline in 12 patients (P = 0.003). No difference was found in the respiratory rate before and after PP (P = 0.20). Only 4 patients (30%) avoided intubation and 6 (46%) survived and were discharged home. Interestingly, the improvement in PaO2:FiO2 appeared to be greater in survivors but didn’t achieve significance (P = 0.668).

TABLE 1 Demographic, Clinical and Laboratory Data of COVID-19 Patients Treated With CPAP and PP

* Abbreviations: COVID-19: coronavirus disease 2019; M: male; F: female; BMI: body mass index, calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared; COPD: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; AF: atrial fibrillation; DM: diabetes mellitus; CHD: coronary heart disease; AH: arterial hypertension. NR: normal range; CPAP: continuous positive airway pressure, PP: prone position, ET: endotracheal intubation.

** The normal PaO2:FIO2 ratio is more than 400 mm Hg; if PaO2:FIO2 less than 300 mm Hg indicates acute respiratory distress syndrome.

*** For patients with more than one PP cycle, time is expressed as the mean time in PP.

To our knowledge, this is the first study on CPAP with PP in COVID-19 patients. The oxygenation results are consistent with those of Sartini et al. Reference Sartini, Tresoldi and Scarpellini5 and other previously published studies Reference Scaravilli, Grasselli and Castagna3,Reference Valter, Christensen and Tollund4 ; however, Sartini et al. Reference Sartini, Tresoldi and Scarpellini5 reported that PP improved respiratory rate, while in our case series and that of Scaravilli et al., Reference Scaravilli, Grasselli and Castagna3 no difference before and after was found. This could be explained by the fact that the mean age of patients in Sartini et al.’s study was 59 years, Reference Sartini, Tresoldi and Scarpellini5 whereas in ours and Scaravilli et al.’s Reference Scaravilli, Grasselli and Castagna3 studies, mean ages were 66.3 and 66 years, respectively. Moreover, our patients were more severely ill at the time of the PP, which might have increased the chance of selection bias in Sartini et al.’s Reference Sartini, Tresoldi and Scarpellini5 study.

Finally, our results do not suggest a lower intubation or death rate. However, no conclusions can be drawn at the current stage given the retrospective study design, small sample size, lack of control group, and incomplete data of our case series and other published studies.

Importantly, pending results from ongoing randomized controlled trials (NCT04347941, NCT04350723), the outcomes of all COVID-19 patients with ARDS included in small case series and treated with NIV combined with PP would supply more helpful information on whether an improvement in PaO2:FiO2 could translate into avoidance of intubation and increased survival.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

References

Ding, L, Wang, L, Ma, W, et al. Efficacy and safety of early prone positioning combined with HFNC or NIV in moderate to severe ARDS: a multi-center prospective cohort study. Crit Care. 2020;24:28.10.1186/s13054-020-2738-5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feltracco, P, Serra, E, Barbieri, S, et al. Non-invasive ventilation in prone position for refractory hypoxemia after bilateral lung transplantation. Clin Transplant. 2009;23:748-750.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scaravilli, V, Grasselli, G, Castagna, L, et al. Prone positioning improves oxygenation in spontaneously breathing nonintubated patients with hypoxemic acute respiratory failure: a retrospective study. J Crit Care. 2015;30:1390-1394.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Valter, C, Christensen, AM, Tollund, C, et al. Response to the prone position in spontaneously breathing patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2003;47:416-418.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sartini, C, Tresoldi, M, Scarpellini, P, et al. Respiratory parameters in patients with COVID-19 after using noninvasive ventilation in the prone position outside the intensive care unit. JAMA. 2020;323(22):2338-2340.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elharrar, X, Trigui, Y, Dols, AM, et al. Use of prone positioning in non-intubated patients with COVID-19 and hypoxemic acute respiratory failure. JAMA. 2020;323(22):2336-2338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
You have Access
Open access
3
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Prone Positioning in Non-Intubated Patients With COVID-19 Outside of the Intensive Care Unit: More Evidence Needed
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Prone Positioning in Non-Intubated Patients With COVID-19 Outside of the Intensive Care Unit: More Evidence Needed
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Prone Positioning in Non-Intubated Patients With COVID-19 Outside of the Intensive Care Unit: More Evidence Needed
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *