Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • For authors
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Author FAQs
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
  • Alerts
  • Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • For authors
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Author FAQs
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
  • Alerts
  • Podcasts
  • Subscriptions

Building the house of CARDS by phenotyping on the fly

Rajkumar Rajendram
European Respiratory Journal 2020 56: 2002429; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.02429-2020
Rajkumar Rajendram
1Dept of Medicine, King Abdulaziz Medical City, King Abdulaziz International Medical Research Center, Ministry of National Guard – Health Affairs, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
2College of Medicine, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University of Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Rajkumar Rajendram
  • For correspondence: rajkumarrajendram@doctors.org.uk
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Using clinical, pathophysiological and immunological phenotyping of ARDS to refine management of COVID-19 is urgently required to improve outcomes from refractory hypoxia https://bit.ly/2VvZe1p

To the Editor:

Some patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), fulfilling the Berlin criteria for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), do not respond well to the current treatment paradigm [1]. The perspective by Rello et al. [2] on phenotypes of COVID-19, and the editorial by Bos et al. [3], are therefore of great interest. The “responsible” phenotyping of COVID-19 ARDS (CARDS) recommended by Bos et al. [3] may be expedited by re-evaluating the existing literature on refractory hypoxia.

In 2000, the landmark ARDS Network (ARDSNet) trial demonstrated that ventilation with low tidal volumes (VT; 6–8 mL·kg−1 predicted body weight (PBW)), titration of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) to inspiratory oxygen fraction and maintaining plateau pressure under 30 cmH2O significantly reduced mortality [4]. The mortality in the group that received ARDSNet ventilation (31.0%) was significantly lower than that of the control group (39.8%) who were ventilated with a “traditional” high VT strategy (12 mL·kg−1 PBW) [4]. Absolute risk reduction was 8.8%, so the number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one death is 11.4.

So, for the past 20 years, the ARDSNet protocol has set the standard for ventilation of patients with ARDS. Bos et al. [3] essentially say that this is rightly so, and suggest that the ARDSNet protocol should also be rigorously applied to CARDS. Indeed, the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines for the management of COVID-19 [5] support Bos et al. [3].

However, in the ARDSNet trial, approximately 30% of patients receiving ARDSNet ventilation died, and just over 60% of controls survived [4]. Thus, although the NNT is low, of every 11.4 patients with ARDS, 10.4 do not benefit from this ventilatory strategy and 60% can tolerate high VT.

In 2015, Amato et al. [6] reported a multilevel mediation reanalysis of pooled data from four randomised controlled trials of ventilatory strategies for ARDS. This showed that driving pressure (i.e. plateau pressure minus total PEEP; ΔP) was the ventilator variable most strongly associated with survival. Any change in VT or PEEP only improved outcomes if associated with a fall in ΔP [6].

Thus, while the net effect of the ARDSNet protocol is beneficial at the level of the study population, theoretically it may harm select patients, particularly when not associated with a fall in ΔP. Therefore, contrary to the opinions of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign [5] and Bos et al. [3], the ARDSNet protocol is not a panacea. Unfortunately, the subgroup of patients with ARDS who do not benefit from the ARDSNet protocol is a “known unknown”. So individualising ventilatory support is currently extremely challenging.

To improve outcomes, further research is required to determine which patients benefit from the ARDSNet protocol (i.e. phenotyping). This will allow consideration of alternative strategies for patients who are unlikely to benefit from the ARDSNet protocol.

Sadly, the literature on ARDS is littered with promising interventions that were associated with improved outcomes in case reports, case series and observational studies but were subsequently discarded after large randomised controlled trials. This may reflect the shortcomings of previous research on ARDS. Indiscriminate recruitment of heterogeneous cohorts of patients generated significant noise, which may have drowned out any potential benefits in specific subgroups of patients.

The COVID-19 pandemic provides the unique opportunity to rectify this deplorable situation by responsibly phenotyping “on the fly”. The evidence-base for the management of refractory hypoxia could be significantly advanced by analysing the effect of interventions such as nitric oxide and prone positioning on multiple phenotypes of ARDS with a unique aetiology. Observations in CARDS may be relevant to other respiratory diseases. However, to increase generalisability, future studies should, a priori, explore outcomes in clinically, pathophysiologically and immunologically defined subgroups.

Shareable PDF

Supplementary Material

This one-page PDF can be shared freely online.

Shareable PDF ERJ-02429-2020.Shareable

Footnotes

  • Author contributions: R. Rajendram developed the hypothesis, performed the literature search and refined the hypothesis. R. Rajendram prepared the initial draft of the manuscript, revised the manuscript and approved the final version of the manuscript for publication.

  • Conflict of interest: R. Rajendram has nothing to disclose.

  • Received June 21, 2020.
  • Accepted June 28, 2020.
  • Copyright ©ERS 2020
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

This version is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Gattinoni L,
    2. Coppola S,
    3. Cressoni M, et al.
    COVID-19 does not lead to a “typical” acute respiratory distress syndrome. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2020; 201: 1299–1300. doi:10.1164/rccm.202003-0817LE
    OpenUrlPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Rello J,
    2. Storti E,
    3. Belliato M, et al.
    Clinical phenotypes of SARS-CoV-2: implications for clinicians and researchers. Eur Respir J 2020; 55: 2001028. doi:10.1183/13993003.01028-2020
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    1. Bos LDJ,
    2. Sinha P,
    3. Dickson RP
    . The perils of premature phenotyping in COVID-19: a call for caution. Eur Respir J 2020; 56: 2001768. doi:10.1183/13993003.01768-2020
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. ↵
    1. Brower RG,
    2. Matthay MA,
    3. Morris A, et al.
    Ventilation with lower tidal volumes as compared with traditional tidal volumes for acute lung injury and the acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med 2000; 342: 1301–1308. doi:10.1056/NEJM200005043421801
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  5. ↵
    1. Alhazzani W,
    2. Møller MH,
    3. Arabi YM, et al.
    Surviving Sepsis Campaign: guidelines on the management of critically ill adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Crit Care Med 2020; 48: e440–e469. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000004363
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Amato MBP,
    2. Meade MO,
    3. Slutsky AS, et al.
    Driving pressure and survival in the acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med 2015; 372: 747–755. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa1410639
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top
View this article with LENS
Vol 56 Issue 2 Table of Contents
European Respiratory Journal: 56 (2)
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Building the house of CARDS by phenotyping on the fly
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation Tools
Building the house of CARDS by phenotyping on the fly
Rajkumar Rajendram
European Respiratory Journal Aug 2020, 56 (2) 2002429; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.02429-2020

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Building the house of CARDS by phenotyping on the fly
Rajkumar Rajendram
European Respiratory Journal Aug 2020, 56 (2) 2002429; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.02429-2020
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Shareable PDF
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

Agora

  • Reply: Is high-dose glucocorticoid beneficial in COVID-19?
  • Is high-dose glucocorticoid beneficial in COVID-19?
  • Corticosteroids in COVID-19: one size does not fit all
Show more Agora

Correspondence

  • Corticosteroids in COVID-19: one size does not fit all
  • Reply: Is high-dose glucocorticoid beneficial in COVID-19?
  • Is high-dose glucocorticoid beneficial in COVID-19?
Show more Correspondence

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About the ERJ

  • Journal information
  • Editorial board
  • Reviewers
  • CME
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Instructions for authors
  • Submit a manuscript
  • ERS author centre

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • Podcasts
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Print ISSN:  0903-1936
Online ISSN: 1399-3003

Copyright © 2021 by the European Respiratory Society