Squamous cell carcinoma was the most common type of lung cancer in IPF patients. IPF reduced the survival of surgically treated lung cancer patients regardless of age, sex, histologic type, and/or lung cancer stage.

Objectives: Prone position ventilation improves oxygenation and reduces the mortality of patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. However, there is limited evidence about which patients would gain most survival benefit from prone positioning. Herein, we investigated whether the improvement in oxygenation after prone positioning is associated with survival and aimed to identify patients who will gain most survival benefit from prone positioning in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Design: A retrospective cohort study. Setting: Medical ICU at a tertiary academic hospital between 2014 and 2020. Patients: Adult patients receiving prone positioning for moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: The main outcomes were ICU and 28-day mortality. A total of 116 patients receiving prone positioning were included, of whom 45 (38.8%) were ICU survivors. Although there was no difference in Pao 2:Fio 2 ratio before the first prone session between ICU survivors and nonsurvivors, ICU survivors had a higher Pao 2:Fio 2 ratio after prone positioning than nonsurvivors, with significant between-group difference (p < 0.001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the percentage change in the Pao 2:Fio 2 ratio between the baseline and 8–12 hours after the first prone positioning to predict ICU mortality was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.80–0.94), with an optimal cutoff value of 53.5% (sensitivity, 91.5%; specificity, 73.3%). Prone responders were defined as an increase in Pao 2:Fio 2 ratio of greater than or equal to 53.5%. In the multivariate Cox regression analysis, prone responders (hazard ratio, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.05–0.25), immunocompromised condition (hazard ratio, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.15–4.03), and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (hazard ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.06–1.27) were significantly associated with 28-day mortality. Conclusions: The Pao 2:Fio 2 ratio after the first prone positioning differed significantly between ICU survivors and nonsurvivors. The improvement in oxygenation after the first prone positioning was a significant predictor of survival in patients with moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Background Prone positioning is recommended for patients with moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) receiving mechanical ventilation. While the debate continues as to whether COVID-19 ARDS is clinically different from non-COVID ARDS, there is little data on whether the physiological effects of prone positioning differ between the two conditions. We aimed to compare the physiological effect of prone positioning between patients with COVID-19 ARDS and those with non-COVID ARDS. Methods We retrospectively compared 23 patients with COVID-19 ARDS and 145 patients with non-COVID ARDS treated using prone positioning while on mechanical ventilation. Changes in PaO2/FiO2 ratio and static respiratory system compliance (Crs) after the first session of prone positioning were compared between the two groups: first, using all patients with non-COVID ARDS, and second, using subgroups of patients with non-COVID ARDS matched 1:1 with patients with COVID-19 ARDS for baseline PaO2/FiO2 ratio and static Crs. We also evaluated whether the response to the first prone positioning session was associated with the clinical outcome. Results When compared with the entire group of patients with non-COVID ARDS, patients with COVID-19 ARDS showed more pronounced improvement in PaO2/FiO2 ratio [adjusted difference 39.3 (95% CI 5.2–73.5) mmHg] and static Crs [adjusted difference 3.4 (95% CI 1.1–5.6) mL/cmH2O]. However, these between-group differences were not significant when the matched samples (either PaO2/FiO2-matched or compliance-matched) were analyzed. Patients who successfully discontinued mechanical ventilation showed more remarkable improvement in PaO2/FiO2 ratio [median 112 (IQR 85–144) vs. 35 (IQR 6–52) mmHg, P = 0.003] and static compliance [median 5.7 (IQR 3.3–7.7) vs. − 1.0 (IQR − 3.7–3.0) mL/cmH2O, P = 0.006] after prone positioning compared with patients who did not. The association between oxygenation and Crs responses to prone positioning and clinical outcome was also evident in the adjusted competing risk regression. Conclusions In patients with COVID-19 ARDS, prone positioning was as effective in improving respiratory physiology as in patients with non-COVID ARDS. Thus, it should be actively considered as a therapeutic option. The physiological response to the first session of prone positioning was predictive of the clinical outcome of patients with COVID-19 ARDS.

OBJECTIVES:Frailty is a multidimensional syndrome or state of increased vulnerability to poor resolution of homoeostasis following a stressor event. Frailty is common in patients with sepsis. Sepsis and frailty are both associated with older age and chronic medical conditions. However, there is limited evidence about the direct association between frailty and sepsis. The aim of this study is to determine the association between preexisting clinical frailty and clinical outcomes in patients with sepsis. DESIGN:A nationwide propensity score-matched cohort study analyzing data prospectively collected between September 2019 and February 2020. SETTING:Nineteen tertiary or university-affiliated hospitals in South Korea. PATIENTS:Adult patients who were diagnosed with sepsis. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Frailty status was assessed using the Clinical Frailty Scale. All patients were classified as "frail" (Clinical Frailty Scale score, 5-9) or "nonfrail" (Clinical Frailty Scale score, 1-4). Propensity score matching identified comparable nonfrail patients. The primary outcome was inhospital mortality. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the association between frailty and inhospital mortality. The propensity scorematched cohort comprised 468 nonfrail patients and 468 frail patients; all covariate imbalances were alleviated. In the matched cohort (mean age, 69 ± 14 yr), 27.2% had septic shock at presentation. Inhospital mortality was 34.2% in the frail group and 26.9% in the nonfrail group (p = 0.019). The adjusted odds ratio for inhospital mortality in the frail group compared with the nonfrail group was 2.00 (95% CI, 1.39-2.89; p < 0.001). Among the patients who survived to discharge, the frail group was less likely to be discharged home compared with the nonfrail group, 64.0% versus 81.3%, respectively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:In patients with sepsis, preexisting clinical frailty is associated with worse clinical outcomes than that in nonfrail patients, including inhospital mortality and discharge to home.

This study revealed that patients with IPF have a higher cancer incidence risk than matched controls without IPF. Physicians should be aware of this risk when treating patients with IPF.

Background A spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) is used to determine whether patients are ready for extubation, but the best method for choosing the SBT strategy remains controversial. We investigated the effect of high-flow oxygen versus T-piece ventilation strategies during SBT on rates of weaning failure among patients receiving mechanical ventilation. Methods This randomized clinical trial was conducted from June 2019 through January 2022 among patients receiving mechanical ventilation for ≥ 12 h who fulfilled the weaning readiness criteria at a single-center medical intensive care unit. Patients were randomized to undergo either T-piece SBT or high-flow oxygen SBT. The primary outcome was weaning failure on day 2, and the secondary outcomes were weaning failure on day 7, ICU and hospital length of stay, and ICU and in-hospital morality. Results Of 108 patients (mean age, 67.0 ± 11.1 years; 64.8% men), 54 received T-piece SBT and 54 received high-flow oxygen SBT. Weaning failure on day 2 occurred in 5 patients (9.3%) in the T-piece group and 3 patients (5.6%) in the high-flow group (difference, 3.7% [95% CI, − 6.1–13.6]; p = 0.713). Weaning failure on day 7 occurred in 13 patients (24.1%) in the T-piece group and 7 patients (13.0%) in the high-flow group (difference, 11.1% [95% CI, − 3.4–25.6]; p = 0.215). A post hoc subgroup analysis showed that high-flow oxygen SBT was significantly associated with a lower rate of weaning failure on day 7 (OR, 0.17 [95% CI, 0.04–0.78]) among those patients intubated because of respiratory failure (p for interaction = 0.020). The ICU and hospital length of stay and mortality rates did not differ significantly between the two groups. During the study, no serious adverse events were recorded. Conclusions Among patients receiving mechanical ventilation, high-flow oxygen SBT did not significantly reduce the risk of weaning failure compared with T-piece SBT. However, the study may have been underpowered to detect a clinically important treatment effect for the comparison of high-flow oxygen SBT versus T-piece SBT, and a higher percentage of patients with simple weaning and a lower weaning failure rate than expected should be considered when interpreting the findings. Clinical trial registration This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT03929328) on April 26, 2019.

No abstract

The appropriate strategy for enteral feeding remains a matter of debate. We hypothesized that continuous enteral feeding would result in higher rates of achieving target nutrition during the first 7 days compared with intermittent enteral feeding. We conducted an unblinded, single-center, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial involving adult patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit who required mechanical ventilation to determine the efficacy and safety of continuous enteral feeding for critically ill patients compared with intermittent enteral feeding. The primary endpoint was the achievement of ≥80% of the target nutrition requirement during the first 7 days after starting enteral feeding. A total of 99 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (intermittent enteral feeding group, n = 49; continuous enteral feeding group, n = 50). The intermittent enteral feeding group and continuous enteral feeding group received 227 days and 226 days of enteral feeding, respectively. The achievement of ≥80% of the target nutrition requirement occurred significantly more frequently in the continuous enteral feeding group than in the intermittent enteral feeding group (65.0% versus 52.4%, respectively; relative risk, 1.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.06–1.45; p = 0.008). For patients undergoing mechanical ventilation, continuous enteral feeding significantly improved the achievement of target nutrition requirements.