Jan Hau Lee, MBBS, MRCPCH. MCI Children’s Intensive Care Unit KK Women’s and Children's Hospital,Singapore 1 Progress in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Pediatrics
32
Embed
Progress in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Pediatrics
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
PowerPoint PresentationChildren’s Intensive Care Unit KK Women’s and Children's Hospital,Singapore 1 2 Organizer of WFPICCS 2018 Video at the end of my presentation Overview • Current Epidemiology 4 Ashbaugh et al. Lancet 1967 Ware and Matthay. N Engl J Med 2004 Pediatric ARDS • Lack of pediatric specific data 5 Cheifetz. Respir Care 2016 • Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Khemani et al. Ped Crit Care Med 2015 Age Exclude patients with perinatal related lung disease Timing Within 7 days of known clinical insult Origin of Edema Respiratory failure not fully explained by cardiac failure or fluid overload Chest Imaging Chest imaging findings of new infiltrates consistent with acute pulmonary parenchymal disease Full face-mask bi-level Special Populations Cyanotic Heart Disease Standard criteria above for age, timing, origin of edema and chest imaging with an acute deterioration in oxygenation not explained by underlying cardiac disease. Chronic Lung Disease Standard criteria above for age, timing and origin of edema with chest imaging consistent with new infiltrate and acute deterioration in oxygenation from baseline which meet oxygenation criteria above. Left Ventricular Standard criteria for age, timing and origin of edema with chest imaging changes consistent with new infiltrate and acute deterioration in oxygenation which meet criteria above not explained by left ventricular dysfunction. Khemani et al. Ped Crit Care Med 2015 How would I change my practice? • Move away from adult-based definitions o AECC definition o No more “acute lung injury” o Berlin definition • Increased recognition of mild PARDS 9 Overview • Current Epidemiology Tale of Two Systematic Reviews Schouten et al. • Aims: – Estimate population • Excluded studies with < 10 patients Wong et al. • Medline, Embase and Web of Science • 1960 – August 2015 12 Schouten et al. Crit Care Med 2016 Wong et al. Journal of Intensive Care 2017 Pediatric ARDS • Population-based incidence: 3.5 per 100,000 person years (95% CI: 2.2 – 5.7) • PICU-based incidence: 2.3% (95% CI: 1.9 – 2.9%) 13 14 • Significant higher mortality in studies performed in Asia • No change in mortality over time in Asia Study design did not influence reported mortality rates Schouten et al. Crit Care Med 2016 • Overall mortality: 24% (95% CI: 19 – 31) • A later year of study was associated with survival [OR for mortality: 0.94; 95%: 0.94 – 0.95] 15 Observational studies • No difference in mortality reported in observational studies and RCTs Overview • Current Epidemiology • Pressing need for pediatric critical care medicine collaboration in Asia • Predominantly single center studies 18 19 • Included only patients on (n=135) P value Age, years 1.0 (0.3,4.3) 1.0 (0.3, 4.1) 2.3 (0.7, 5.5) 0.008 Gender, male 52 (58.4) 77 (51.7) 67 (49.6) 0.419 Weight, kg 8.4 (4.7, 14) 7.8 (5, 15) 11 (7, 20) 0.001 PIM 2 score 6.9 (2.8, 13.7) 7.4 (3.5, 18.3) 9.8 (4.4, 30) 0.038 PELOD score 3 (1, 12) 3 (1, 12) 11 (2, 16) 0.048 Presence of co-morbidities 36 (40.4) 77 (51.7) 84 (62.2) 0.006 Risk factors for PARDS: Near drowning 5 (3.5) 6 (4.0) 3 (2.2) 0.414 Others 4 (4.5) 17 (11.4) 14 (10.4) 0.185 OI 5.9 (4.9, 6.7) 11.3 (9.8, 13.6) 25.2 (18.5, 33.2) < 0.001 OSI 5.52 (4.5, 7.2) 9 (7.0, 11.2) 17.1 (14.1, 22.2) < 0.001 PICU mortality: 113/373 (30.3%) 100-day mortality: 126/314 (39.7%) 100-day mortality based on 21 Severity Categories Unadjusted Hazard Ratio P value Adjusted Hazard Ratio P value Mild Reference Reference Moderate 2.69 (1.39 – 5.19) <0.01 2.64 (1.35 – 5.14) <0.01 Severe 4.15 (2.17 – 7.93) < 0.01 4.10 (2.02 – 8.32) <0.01 Using COX Proportional hazard regression model Adjusted for site, presence of co-morbidities and Pediatric Index of Mortality 2 score Outcomes of Extrapulmonary PARDS Sepsis (non-pulmonary) Aspiration Trauma Total number of PARDS patients fulfilling PALICC criteria=427 Not PARDS after data PARDS=373 factor=315 Pnuemonia + sepsis Pneumonia + transfusion Characteristics PARDSp (n=272) PARDSExp (n=43) P value Age 1.1 (0.4, 3.6) 2.6 (0.5, 6.6) 0.0272 Gender 146 (53.7) 24 (55.8) 0.7938 Weight 8.4 (5.4, 15.0) 13.3 (6.5, 20.0) 0.0371 Co-morbidities 134 (49.3) 26 (60.5) 0.1722 Bacteremia 23 (8.5) 23 (53.5) < 0.001 PIM 2 score 6.6 (2.9, 14.1) 19.3 (6.6, 43.0) < 0.0001 PELOD score 10 (1, 12) 12 (3, 22) 0.0001 PF Ratio 126.7 (86.7, 180.0) 103.8 (65.6, 180.9) 0.0792 OI 11.3 (7.2, 17.7) 15.1 (8.6, 25.1) 0.1012 Multiorgan dysfunction Cardiovascular 54 (19.9) 26 (60.5) < 0.0001 Neurologic 21 (07.7) 3 (07.0) 0.8643 Hematologic 38 (14.0) 26 (60.5) < 0.0001 Renal 34 (12.5) 15 (34.9) 0.0002 Hepatic 35 (12.9) 19 (44.2) < 0.0001 Etiologies Pneumonia 250 (92) Non-pulmonary sepsis 35 (81) Aspiration 8 (3) Trauma 4 (9) Drowning/near drowning 14 (5) Transfusion 0 (0) Others 4 (9) PICU Mortality 66 (24.3) 20 (46.5) 0.002 100-day mortality 72 (32.6) 22 (53.7) 0.01 Ventilator free days 19.0 (0.5, 24.0) 2.0 (0.0, 18.0) 0.001 Ventilator Duration 8.0 (4.0, 15.0) 10.0 (4.0, 17.0) 0.295 PICU Duration 11.0 (6.0, 19.0) 12.0 (6 to 29) 0.318 PICU free days 16 (1 to 22) 10 (0 to 21) 0.069 Outcomes 26 Covariates Unadjusted HR (95%CI) P value Adjusted HR (95%CI) P value PIM 2 score 1.017 (1.01 - 1.024) < 0.001 1.025 (1.016 - 1.033) < 0.001 Comorbidities 1.757 (1.154 - 2.677) 0.009 2.566 (1.593 - 4.135) < 0.001 Multiorgan Dysfunction 3.278 (2.17 - 4.953) < 0.001 3.327 (1.967 - 5.628) < 0.001 PARDSExp (Ref: PARDSp) 1.742 (1.081 - 2.809) 0.023 1.689 (0.971 - 2.935) 0.063 PARDS Severity (Ref: Mild) Cox Regression • Current Epidemiology • Increasing studies in PARDS over the next 5 – 10 years • PALICC consensus statements’ publication is a major step in pediatric critical care • Future studies should consider the needs and gaps highlighted by this document • Long term follow-up of survivors of PARDS • Multi-center studies across the globe to compare and contrast current practices Concluding Remarks feasible overcome equally important