Responsiveness of Inhaled Epoprostenol in Respiratory Failure due to COVID-19

Half of ventilated COVID-19 patients get a meaningful oxygen boost from an inhaled lung drug

R Sonti, CW Pike, N Cobb

Journal of Intensive Care Medicine: 885066620976525 (2020)

Plain-language summary

In our study of 80 critically ill COVID-19 patients on ventilators, we examined whether inhaling a medication that widens blood vessels in the lungs (epoprostenol) could improve dangerously low oxygen levels. We found that half of the patients experienced a meaningful boost in oxygenation after receiving the drug, though the average improvement was modest and responses varied widely. Patients who were positioned face-down or had the most severe oxygen deficits were more likely to benefit. Our results indicate that this inhaled therapy can be a helpful rescue option for some individuals with COVID-19-related respiratory failure, but it is not universally effective.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Inhaled pulmonary vasodilators are used as adjunctive therapies for the treatment of refractory hypoxemia. Available evidence suggest they improve oxygenation in a subset of patients without changing long-term trajectory. Given the differences in respiratory failure due to COVID-19 and "traditional" ARDS, we sought to identify their physiologic impact. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study of patients mechanically ventilated for COVID-19, from the ICUs of 2 tertiary care centers, who received inhaled epoprostenol (iEpo) for the management of hypoxemia. The primary outcome is change in PaO2/FiO2. Additionally, we measured several patient level features to predict iEpo responsiveness (or lack thereof). RESULTS: Eighty patients with laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV2 received iEpo while mechanically ventilated and had PaO2/FiO2 measured before and after. The median PaO2/FiO2 prior to receiving iEpo was 92 mmHg and interquartile range (74 - 122). The median change in PaO2/FiO2 was 9 mmHg (-9 - 37) corresponding to a 10% improvement (-8 - 41). Fifty-percent (40 / 80) met our a priori definition of a clinically significant improvement in PaO2/FiO2 (increase in 10% from the baseline value). Prone position and lower PaO2/FiO2 when iEpo was started predicted a more robust response, which held after multivariate adjustment. For proned individuals, improvement in PaO2/FiO2 was 14 mmHg (-6 to 45) vs. 3 mmHg (-11 - 20), p = 0.04 for supine individuals; for those with severe ARDS (PaO2/FiO2 < 100, n = 49) the median improvement was 16 mmHg (-2 - 46). CONCLUSION: Fifty percent of patients have a clinically significant improvement in PaO2/FiO2 after the initiation of iEpo. This suggests it is worth trying as a rescue therapy; although generally the benefit was modest with a wide variability. Those who were prone and had lower PaO2/FiO2 were more likely to respond.

Details

Publication Type
Journal Article
Journal
Journal of Intensive Care Medicine
Date Published
November 25, 2020
Pages
885066620976525
Digital Object Identifier
10.1177/0885066620976525
PubMed Identifier
33234007

Document Preview

Open PDF