Abstract
Rationale The preliminary reports of COVID Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (COVIDARDS) suggest the existence of a subset of patients with higher lung compliance despite profound hypoxemia. Understanding heterogeneity seen in patients with COVIDARDS and comparing to non-COVIDARDS may inform tailored treatments.
Objectives To describe the trajectories of hypoxemia and respiratory compliance in COVIDARDS and associations with outcomes.
Methods A multidisciplinary team of frontline clinicians and data scientists created the Northwell COVIDARDS dataset (NorthCARDS) leveraging over 11,542 COVID-19 hospital admissions. Data was summarized to describe differences based on clinically meaningful categories of lung compliance, and compared to non-COVIDARDS reports. A sophisticated method of extrapolating PaO2 from SpO2, as well estimating FiO2 from non invasive oxygen delivery devices were utilized to create meaningful trends of derived PaO2 to FiO2 (P/F).
Measurements and Main Results Of the 1595 COVIDARDS patients in the NorthCARDS dataset, there were 538 (34·6%) who had very low lung compliance (<20ml/cmH2O), 982 (63·2%) with low-normal compliance (20-50ml/cmH2O), and 34 (2·2%) with high lung compliance (>50ml/cmH2O). The very low compliance group had double the median time to intubation compared to the low-normal group (107 hours(IQR 26·3, 238·3) vs. 37·9 hours(IQR 4·8, 90·7)). Oxygenation trends have improved in all groups after a nadir immediately post intubation. The P/F ratio improved from a mean of 109 to 155, with the very low compliance group showing a smaller improvement compared to low compliance group. The derived P/F trends closely correlated with blood gas analysis driven P/F trends, except immediately post intubation were the trends diverge as illustrated in the image. Overall, 67·5% (n=1049) of the patients died during the hospitalization. In comparison to non-COVIDARDS reports, there were less patients in the high compliance category (2.2%vs.12%, compliance ≥50mL/cmH20), and more patients with P/F ≤ 150 (57·8% vs. 45.6%). No correlation was apparent between lung compliance and P/F ratio. The Oxygenation Index was similar, (11·12(SD 5·67)vs.12·8(SD 10·8)).
Conclusions Heterogeneity in lung compliance is seen in COVIDARDS, without apparent correlation to degree of hypoxemia. Notably, time to intubation was greater in the very low lung compliance category. Understanding ARDS patient heterogeneity must include consideration of treatment patterns in addition to trajectories of change in patient-level data and demographics.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by philanthropic funds to the Feinstein Center for Health Outcomes and Innovation Research. The funding source did not control any aspect of the study and did not review the results. All authors had full access to the full data in the study and accept responsibility to submit for publication.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was considered by Northwell Health Institutional Review Board as minimal-risk using data collected for routine clinical practice and waived the requirement for informed consent.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The authors welcome qualified third parties and experts to review the paper and would gladly share the de-identified dataset as well research methods and data analysis.
