Comparison of a small COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) cohort with a historical pre-COVID-19 ARDS cohort found some differences in physiologic parameters and biomarkers, but not enough evidence to warrant deviation from known management guidelines.
Using newer methodology in network meta-analysis to compare various protective mechanical ventilation strategies, the authors concluded that a low tidal volume strategy combined with prone ventilation was associated with the greatest risk reduction in mortality for moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome.
Optimizing positive end-expiratory pressure to minimize driving pressure may be a better strategy for ventilator adjustment than maximizing partial pressure of arterial oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen (P/F) ratios to improve outcomes in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome.
In patients on venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for acute respiratory distress syndrome, prone positioning is safe and feasible. Prone positioning appears to improve survival but increases length of stay.
This retrospective analysis compared historical cohorts with COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) with respect to compliance and arterial partial pressure of oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen (P/F) ratios. For comparable P/F ratios, patients with ARDS caused by COVID-19 had higher lung compliance and more lung gas volume.