RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Mechanical ventilation utilization in COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.06.04.20122069
DO 10.1101/2020.06.04.20122069
A1 Almeshari, Mohammed A.
A1 Alobaidi, Nowaf Y.
A1 Al Asmri, Mansour
A1 Alhuthail, Eyas
A1 Alshehri, Ziyad
A1 Alenezi, Farhan
A1 Sapey, Elizabeth
A1 Parekh, Dhruv
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/06/14/2020.06.04.20122069.abstract
AB Background In December 2019, SARS-CoV-2 caused a global pandemic with a viral infection called COVID-19. The disease usually causes respiratory symptoms but in a small proportion of patients can lead to a pneumonitis, Adult Respiratory Distress Syndrome and death. Invasive Mechanical Ventilation (IMV) is considered a life-saving treatment for COVID-19 patients and a huge demand for IMV devices was reported globally. This review aims to provide insight on the initial IMV practices for COVID-19 patients in the initial phase of the pandemic.Methods Electronic databases (Embase and MEDLINE) were searched for applicable articles using relevant keywords. The references of included articles were hand searched. Articles that reported the use of IMV in adult COVID-19 patients were included in the review. The NIH quality assessment tool for cohort and cross-sectional studies was used to appraise studies.Results 106 abstracts were identified from the databases search, of which 16 were included. 4 studies were included in the meta-analysis. In total, 9988 patients were included across all studies. The overall cases of COVID-19 requiring IMV ranged from 2–75%. Increased age and pre-existing comorbidities increased the likelihood of IMV requirement. The reported mortality rate in patients receiving IMV ranged between 50–100%. On average, IMV was required and initiated between 10–10.5 days from symptoms onset. When invasively ventilated, COVID-19 patients required IMV for a median of 10–17 days across studies. Little information was provided on ventilatory protocols or management strategies and were inconclusive.Conclusion In these initial reporting studies for the first month of the pandemic, patients receiving IMV were older and had more pre-existing co-morbidities than those who did not require IMV. The mortality rate was high in COVID-19 patients who received IMV. Studies are needed to evaluate protocols and modalities of IMV to improve outcomes and identify the populations most likely to benefit from IMV.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical Protocols https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=178262 Funding Statementno external funding was receivedAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Not applicable.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesAll data generated or analysed during this review are obtained from the included peer-reviewed published articles.