BackgroundIndirect indices for measuring impaired ventilation, such as the estimated dead space fraction and the ventilatory ratio, have been shown to be independently associated with an increased risk of mortality. This study aimed to compare various methods for dead space estimation and the ventilatory ratio in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and to determine their independent values for predicting death at day 30. The present study is a post hoc analysis of a prospective observational cohort study of ICUs of two tertiary care hospitals in the Netherlands.ResultsIndividual patient data from 940 ARDS patients were analyzed. Estimated dead space fraction and the ventilatory ratio at days 1 and 2 were significantly higher among non-survivors (p < 0.01). Dead space fraction calculation using the estimate from physiological variables [VD/VT phys] and the ventilatory ratio at day 2 showed independent association with mortality at 30 days (odds ratio 1.28 [95% CI 1.02–1.61], p < 0.03 and 1.20 [95% CI, 1.01–1.40], p < 0.03, respectively); whereas, the Harris–Benedict [VD/VT HB] and Penn State [VD/VT PS] estimations were not associated with mortality. The predicted validity of the estimated dead space fraction and the ventilatory ratio improved the baseline model based on PEEP, PaO2/FiO2, driving pressure and compliance of the respiratory system at day 2 (AUROCC 0.72 vs. 0.69, p < 0.05).ConclusionsEstimated methods for dead space calculation and the ventilatory ratio during the early course of ARDS are associated with mortality at day 30 and add statistically significant but limited improvement in the predictive accuracy to indices of oxygenation and respiratory system mechanics at the second day of mechanical ventilation.

The biological effects and physiological consequences of hypercapnia are increasingly understood. The literature on hypercapnia is confusing, and at times contradictory. On the one hand, it may have protective effects through attenuation of pulmonary inflammation and oxidative stress. On the other hand, it may also have deleterious effects through inhibition of alveolar wound repair, reabsorption of alveolar fluid, and alveolar cell proliferation. Besides, hypercapnia has meaningful effects on lung physiology such as airway resistance, lung oxygenation, diaphragm function, and pulmonary vascular tree. In acute respiratory distress syndrome, lung-protective ventilation strategies using low tidal volume and low airway pressure are strongly advocated as these have strong potential to improve outcome. These strategies may come at a price of hypercapnia and hypercapnic acidosis. One approach is to accept it (permissive hypercapnia); another approach is to treat it through extracorporeal means. At present, it remains uncertain what the best approach is. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s40635-019-0239-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) presents a complex pathophysiology characterized by pulmonary activated coagulation and reduced fibrinolysis. Despite advances in supportive care of this syndrome, morbidity and mortality remains high, leading to the need of novel therapies to combat this disease. Focus these therapies in the inhibition of ARDS development pathophysiology is essential. Beneficial effects of anticoagulants in ARDS have been proved in preclinical and clinical trials, thanks to its anticoagulant and anti-inflammatory properties. Moreover, local administration by nebulization in the alveolar compartment increases local efficacy and does not produce systemic bleeding. In this review the coagulation and fibrinolytic pathway and its pharmacological targets to treat ARDS are summarized.

Sepsis and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are life threating diseases with high mortality and morbidity in all the critical care units around the world. After decades of research, and numerous pre-clinical and clinical trials, sepsis and ARDS remain without a specific and effective pharmacotherapy and essentially the management remains supportive. In the last years cell therapies gained potential as a therapeutic treatment for ARDS and sepsis. Based on numerous pre-clinical studies, there is a growing evidence of the potential benefits of cell based therapies for the treatment of sepsis and ARDS. Several cell types are used in the last years for the treatment of both syndromes showing high efficiency. Embryonic stem cells (ESC), multipotent stem (or stromal) cells (MSC) and epithelial progenitors cells (EpPC) have been used for both diseases. Nowadays, the major part of the pre-clinical studies are using MSC, however other relevant groups are also using induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC) for the treatment of both syndromes and alveolar type II cells for ARDS treatment. Numerous questions need further study including: determining the best source for the progenitor cells isolation, their large scale production and cryopreservation. Also, the heterogeneity of patients with sepsis and ARDS is massive, and establish a target population or the stratification of the patients will help us to determine better the therapeutic effect of these cell therapies. In this review we are going to describe briefly the different cell types, their potential sources and characteristics and mechanism of action. Here, also we elucidate the results of several pre-clicinical and clinical studies in ARDS and in sepsis and the future directions of these studies.

The defining features of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are an excessive inflammatory respiratory response associated with high morbidity and mortality. Treatment consists mainly of measures to avoid worsening lung injury and cannot reverse the underlying pathophysiological process. New pharmacological agents have shown promising results in preclinical studies; however, they have not been successfully translated to patients with ARDS. The lack of effective therapeutic interventions has resulted in a recent interest in strategies to prevent ARDS with treatments delivering medications directly to the lungs by inhalation and nebulization, hopefully minimizing systemic adverse events. We analyzed the effect of different aerosolized drugs such as bronchodilators, corticosteroids, pulmonary vasodilators, anticoagulants, mucolytics and surfactant. New therapeutic strategies and ongoing trials using carbon monoxide (CO) and AP301 peptide are also briefly reviewed.

BackgroundIn the early stages of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), pro-inflammatory mediators inhibit natural anticoagulant factors and initiate an increase in procoagulant activity. Previous studies proved the beneficial effects of heparin in pulmonary coagulopathy, which derive from its anticoagulant and anti-inflammatory activities, although it is uncertain whether heparin works. Understanding the specific effect of unfractioned heparin on cell lung populations would be of interest to increase our knowledge about heparin pathways and to treat ARDS.MethodsIn the current study, the effect of heparin was assessed in primary human alveolar macrophages (hAM), alveolar type II cells (hATII), and fibroblasts (hF) that had been injured with LPS.ResultsHeparin did not produce any changes in the Smad/TGFß pathway, in any of the cell types evaluated. Heparin reduced the expression of pro-inflammatory markers (TNF-α and IL-6) in hAM and deactivated the NF-kß pathway in hATII, diminishing the expression of IRAK1 and MyD88 and their effectors, IL-6, MCP-1 and IL-8.ConclusionsThe current study demonstrated that heparin significantly ameliorated the cells lung injury induced by LPS through the inhibition of pro-inflammatory cytokine expression in macrophages and the NF-kß pathway in alveolar cells. Our results suggested that a local pulmonary administration of heparin through nebulization may be able to reduce inflammation in the lung; however, further studies are needed to confirm this hypothesis.

Background During acute respiratory distress syndrome, proinflammatory mediators inhibit natural anticoagulant factors, which alter the normal balance between coagulation and fibrinolysis leading to a procoagulant state. We hypothesize that pulmonary administration of anticoagulants might be beneficial to treat acute respiratory distress syndrome for their anticoagulant and antiinflammatory effects and reduce the risk of systemic bleeding. Objectives Our aim is to study the effects of nebulized antithrombin (AT) and combined AT and heparin in an animal model of acute lung injury. Methods Acute lung injury was induced in rats by the intratracheal administration of hydrochloric acid and lipopolysaccharide. AT alone (500 IU/kg body weight) or combined with heparin (1000 IU/kg body weight) were nebulized after the injury. Control groups received saline instead. Blood, lung tissue, bronchoalveolar lavage, and alveolar macrophages (AM) isolated from bronchoalveolar lavage were collected after 48 hours and analyzed. Results Nebulized anticoagulant treatments reduced protein concentration in the lungs and decreased injury‐mediated coagulation factors (tissue factor, plasminogen activator inhibitor‐1, plasminogen, and fibrinogen degradation product) and inflammation (tumor necrosis factor α and interleukin 1β) in the alveolar space without affecting systemic coagulation and no bleeding. AT alone reduced fibrin deposition and edema in the lungs. Heparin did not potentiate AT coagulant effect but promoted the reduction of macrophages infiltration into the alveolar compartment. Anticoagulants reduced nuclear factor‐kB downstream effectors in AM. Conclusions Nebulized AT and heparin attenuate lung injury through decreasing coagulation and inflammation without altering systemic coagulation and no bleeding. However, combined AT and heparin did not produce a synergistic effect.

Objectives: Latest trials failed to confirm merits of nebulized amikacin for critically ill patients with nosocomial pneumonia. We studied various nebulized and IV antibiotic regimens in a porcine model of severe Pseudomonas aeruginosa pneumonia, resistant to amikacin, fosfomycin, and susceptible to meropenem. Design: Prospective randomized animal study. Setting: Animal Research, University of Barcelona, Spain. Subjects: Thirty female pigs. Interventions: The animals were randomized to receive nebulized saline solution (CONTROL); nebulized amikacin every 6 hours; nebulized fosfomycin every 6 hours; IV meropenem alone every 8 hours; nebulized amikacin and fosfomycin every 6 hours; amikacin and fosfomycin every 6 hours, with IV meropenem every 8 hours. Nebulization was performed through a vibrating mesh nebulizer. The primary outcome was lung tissue bacterial concentration. Secondary outcomes were tracheal secretions P. aeruginosa concentration, clinical variables, lung histology, and development of meropenem resistance. Measurements and Main Results: We included five animals into each group. Lung P. aeruginosa burden varied among groups (p < 0.001). In particular, IV meropenem and amikacin and fosfomycin + IV meropenem groups presented lower P. aeruginosa concentrations versus amikacin and fosfomycin, amikacin, CONTROL, and fosfomycin groups (p < 0.05), without significant difference between these two groups undergoing IV meropenem treatment. The sole use of nebulized antibiotics resulted in dense P. aeruginosa accumulation at the edges of the interlobular septa. Amikacin, amikacin and fosfomycin, and amikacin and fosfomycin + IV meropenem effectively reduced P. aeruginosa in tracheal secretions (p < 0.001). Pathognomonic clinical variables of respiratory infection did not differ among groups. Resistance to meropenem increased in IV meropenem group versus amikacin and fosfomycin + meropenem (p = 0.004). Conclusions: Our findings corroborate that amikacin and fosfomycin alone efficiently reduced P. aeruginosa in tracheal secretions, with negligible effects in pulmonary tissue. Combination of amikacin and fosfomycin with IV meropenem does not increase antipseudomonal pulmonary tissue activity, but it does reduce development of meropenem-resistant P. aeruginosa, in comparison with the sole use of IV meropenem. Our findings imply potential merits for preemptive use of nebulized antibiotics in order to reduce resistance to IV meropenem.