Longitudinal respiratory subphenotypes in patients with COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome: results from three observational cohorts

Abstract

Introduction Patients with COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) have been postulated to present with distinct respiratory subphenotypes. However, most phenotyping schema have been limited by sample size, disregard for temporal dynamics, and insufficient validation. We aimed to identify respiratory subphenotypes of COVID-19-related ARDS using unbiased data-driven approaches. Methods PRoVENT–COVID was an investigator-initiated, national, multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study at 22 intensive care units (ICUs) in the Netherlands. Consecutive patients who had received invasive mechanical ventilation for COVID-19 (aged 18 years or older) served as the derivation cohort, and similar patients from two ICUs in the USA served as the replication cohorts. COVID-19 was confirmed by positive RT-PCR. We used latent class analysis to identify subphenotypes using clinically available respiratory data cross-sectionally at baseline, and longitudinally using 8-hourly data from the first 4 days of invasive ventilation. We used group-based trajectory modelling to evaluate trajectories of individual variables and to facilitate potential clinical translation. The PRoVENT-COVID study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04346342 . Findings Between March 1, 2020, and May 15, 2020, 1007 patients were admitted to participating ICUs in the Netherlands, and included in the derivation cohort. Data for 288 patients were included in replication cohort 1 and 326 in replication cohort 2. Cross-sectional latent class analysis did not identify any underlying subphenotypes. Longitudinal latent class analysis identified two distinct subphenotypes. Subphenotype 2 was characterised by higher mechanical power, minute ventilation, and ventilatory ratio over the first 4 days of invasive mechanical ventilation than subphenotype 1, but PaO 2 /FiO 2 , pH, and compliance of the respiratory system did not differ between the two subphenotypes. 185 (28%) of 671 patients with subphenotype 1 and 109 (32%) of 336 patients with subphenotype 2 had died at day 28 (p=0·10). However, patients with subphenotype 2 had fewer ventilator-free days at day 28 (median 0, IQR 0–15 vs 5, 0–17; p=0·016) and more frequent venous thrombotic events (109 [32%] of 336 patients vs 176 [26%] of 671 patients; p=0·048) compared with subphenotype 1. Group-based trajectory modelling revealed trajectories of ventilatory ratio and mechanical power with similar dynamics to those observed in latent class analysis-derived trajectory subphenotypes. The two trajectories were: a stable value for ventilatory ratio or mechanical power over the first 4 days of invasive mechanical ventilation (trajectory A) or an upward trajectory (trajectory B). However, upward trajectories were better independent prognosticators for 28-day m...

Endothelial glycocalyx damage in patients with severe COVID-19 on mechanical ventilation – A prospective observational pilot study

“…Our results support the concept of the role of endothelial dysfunction as one of the mechanisms contributing to organ damage in COVID-19 patients and the higher incidence of thromboembolic events in this population [46][47][48]. syndrome have already been identified [50].…”

COVID-19 Pathophysiology: An Opportunity to Start Appreciating Time-Dependent Variation

“…For example, this paper and another large study using serial biomarker systemic measurements consistently show angiopoietin 2, a marker of endothelial dysfunction, is found in higher concentrations in the plasma of patients requiring ICU treatment and that the temporal change in this biomarker is prognostic in this population ( 9 ). Ventilatory ratio trajectories have also been identified in this patient group ( 10 ), and dynamic changes in this surrogate of dead space ventilation are confirmed in the study by Leisman and colleagues. However, no relation with endothelial dysfunction markers and ventilatory ratio change was found, which may suggest that these two phenomena do not share the same pathophysiology as microvascular thrombosis.…”

Transcriptomic clustering of critically ill COVID-19 patients

“…Opposed to a syndromic approach, clustering within a specific disease such as COVID-19 using routine clinical data has yielded conflicting results. Whereas direct translation of the inflammatory/reactive framework to a single-center cohort has identified equivalent groups 11 , other multicenter studies failed to identify COVID-19 subgroups at ICU admission 12 .…”

“…Several studies have tried to identify severe COVID-19 phenotypes using clinical data, yielding sometimes conflicting results. Although translation of the previously identified ARDS phenotypes to COVID-19 showed two groups of patients with different responses to steroid therapy 11 , other studies failed to identify clear groups of patients using clinical data at admission 12 .…”