CASE PRESENTATION: A 25-year-old super morbidly obese female (body mass index = 55 kg/meter2) presented with worsening shortness of breath. For MV, pairing of a 6 mm (mm) diameter ETT to accommodate the patient's vocal cord edema, with a CSS not designed to maintain a clean catheter tip, precipitated ETT blockage and respiratory acidosis. Replacement of these devices with a 6.5 mm ETT and a CSS designed to keep the catheter tip clean resolved the complications. After use of the different ETT and CSS for approximately one week, the patient was discharged to home.
DISCUSSION: The clean-tip catheter CSS enabled a more patent airway than its counterpart device that did not have this feature. Use of a clean-tip catheter CSS was an important care development for this patient, because this individual's super morbidly obese condition minimized tolerance for MV complications that would exacerbate her pre-existing tenuous respiratory health status.
CONCLUSION: Special attention should be given to the choices of ETT size and CSS to manage super morbidly obese patients who have a history of difficult airway access.
CASE SUMMARY: Two special COVID-19 cases-one full-term pregnant woman and one elderly (72-year-old) man-were treated by veno-venous (VV)-ECMO in the Second People's Hospital of Zhongshan, Zhongshan City, Guangdong Province, China. Both patients had developed refractory hypoxemia shortly after hospital admission, despite conventional support, and were therefore managed by VV-ECMO. Although both experienced multiple ECMO-related complications on top of the COVID-19 disease, their conditions improved gradually. Both patients were weaned successfully from the ECMO therapy. At the time of writing of this report, the woman has recovered completely and been discharged from hospital to home; the man remains on mechanical ventilation, due to respiratory muscle weakness and suspected lung fibrosis. As ECMO itself is associated with various complications, it is very important to understand and treat these complications to achieve optimal outcome.
CONCLUSION: VV-ECMO can provide sufficient gas exchange for COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. However, it is crucial to understand and treat ECMO-related complications.
OBJECTIVES: 1. To assess the effects of CPAP on AoP in preterm infants (this may be compared to supportive care or mechanical ventilation). 2. To assess the effects of different CPAP delivery systems on AoP in preterm infants.
SEARCH METHODS: Searches were conducted in September 2022 in the following databases: Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL. We also searched clinical trial registries and the reference lists of studies selected for inclusion.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which researchers determined that CPAP was necessary for AoP in preterm infants (born before 37 weeks). Cross-over studies were also included, provided sufficient data were available for analysis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methods of Cochrane and Cochrane Neonatal, including independent assessment of risk of bias and extraction of data by at least two review authors. Discrepancies were resolved by involvement of a third author. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence for the following outcomes: 1) failed CPAP; 2) apnoea; 3) adverse effects of CPAP.
MAIN RESULTS: We included four single-centre trials conducted in Malaysia, Spain, Germany, and North America, involving 138 infants with a mean/median gestation of 26 to 28 weeks. Two studies were parallel-group RCTs and two were cross-over trials. None of the studies compared CPAP with supportive care. All trials compared one form of CPAP with another. Two compared a variable flow device with ventilator CPAP, one compared two different variable flow devices, and one compared a variable flow device with bubble CPAP. Interventions were administered for periods ranging between six and 48 hours, with pressures between 4 and 6 cm H2O. We assessed all trials as having a high risk of bias for blinding of participants and personnel, and two studies for blinding of outcome assessors. We found a high risk of a carry-over effect in two studies where the washout period was not adequately described, and a high risk of bias in a study that appeared to use an analysis method not generally accepted for cross-over studies. Comparison 1. CPAP and supportive care compared to supportive care alone We did not identify any study for inclusion in this comparison. Comparison 2. CPAP delivered by different types of devices 2a. Variable flow compared to ventilator CPAP Two studies were included in this comparison. We are very uncertain whether there is any difference in the incidence of failed CPAP, defined as the need for mechanical ventilation (risk ratio (RR) 0.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.01 to 2.90; 1 study, 26 participants; very low-certainty). We are very uncertain whether there is any difference in the frequency of apnoea events (mean difference (MD) per four-hour interval -0.10, 95% CI -1.30 to 1.10; 1 study, 26 participants; very low-certainty). We are uncertain whether there is any difference in adverse events. Neurodevelopmental outcomes were not reported. 2b. Variable flow compared to bubble CPAP We included one study in this comparison, but it did not report our pre-specified outcomes. 2c. Infant Flow variable flow CPAP compared to Medijet variable flow CPAP We are very uncertain whether there is any difference in the incidence of failed CPAP (RR 2.62, 95% CI 0.91 to 7.53; 1 study, 80 participants; very low-certainty). The frequency of apnoea was not reported, and we do not know whether there is any difference in adverse events. Neurodevelopmental outcomes were not reported. Comparison 3. CPAP compared to mechanical ventilation We did not identify any studies for inclusion in this comparison.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Due to the limited available evidence, we are very uncertain whether any CPAP device is more effective than other forms of supportive care, other CPAP devices, or mechanical ventilation for the prevention and treatment of AoP. The devices used in these studies included two types of variable flow CPAP device: bubble CPAP and ventilator CPAP. For each comparison, data were only available from a single study. There are theoretical reasons why these devices might have different effects on AoP, therefore further trials are indicated.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective review of all cases of radiologically proven acute PE over a 20-month period.
RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were identified. The mean age was 61.5 +/- 18.0 years with a female to male ratio of 1.8:1. There were more Malays compared to other races. There were also more Caucasians, given the proximity of the hospital to the airport and the inclusion of tourists. The commonest symptoms were dyspnoea and chest pain, while the commonest signs were tachycardia and tachypnoea. Prolonged immobilisation was the commonest risk factor. Electrocardiographic S1Q3T3 pattern was seen in more patients compared to Western studies. Cardiomegaly was the commonest chest X-ray finding. Thirty-two patients were identified to have a source of embolisation. Overall mortality rate was 21%. The ED diagnosed 36% of the cases. Alternative admitting diagnoses were predominantly ischaemic heart disease and pneumonia. The group diagnosed in the ED were notably female (P = 0.044), Caucasian (P = 0.002) and had prolonged immobilisation (P = 0.025) prior to the onset of PE.
CONCLUSION: Acute PE is not as rare here as previously thought. Clinical features reveal more similarities than differences compared to other studies in the literature. We advocate a high index of suspicion for earlier diagnosis in the ED.
METHODS: A substudy of a prospective interrupted time series cohort study conducted at three time points in EDs in Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Hong Kong and Malaysia of patients presenting to the ED with dyspnoea as a main symptom. Data were collected over three 72-h periods and included demographics, co-morbidities, mode of arrival, usual medications, ED investigations and treatment, ED diagnosis and disposition, and outcome. The primary outcomes of interest are the epidemiology and outcome of patients aged 75 years or older presenting to the ED with dyspnoea.
RESULTS: 1097 patients were included. Older patients with dyspnoea made up 1.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.7-1.9%] of ED presentations. The most common diagnoses were heart failure (25.3%), lower respiratory tract infection (25.2%) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (17.6%). Hospital ward admission was required for 82.6% (95% CI 80.2-84.7%), with 2.5% (95% CI 1.7-3.6%) requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission. In-hospital mortality was 7.9% (95% CI 6.3-9.7%). Median length of stay was 5 days (interquartile range 2-8 days).
CONCLUSION: Older patients with dyspnoea make up a significant proportion of ED case load, and have a high admission rate and significant mortality. Exacerbations or worsening of pre-existing chronic disease account for a large proportion of cases which may be amenable to improved chronic disease management.