Safety of inter-facility transport strategies for patients referred for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome

Abstract Background Inter-facility transport of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in the prone position (PP) is a high-risk situation, compared to other strategies. We aimed to quantify the prevalence of complications during transport in PP, compared to transports with veno-ve...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Malik Haoutar, David Pinero, Hodane Yonis, Eric Cesareo, Mehdi Mezidi, Olivier Peguet, Karim Tazarourte, Matteo Pozzi, Pierre-Yves Dubien, Jean-Christophe Richard, Laurent Bitker
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2023-11-01
Series:BMC Emergency Medicine
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12873-023-00901-y
Description
Summary:Abstract Background Inter-facility transport of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in the prone position (PP) is a high-risk situation, compared to other strategies. We aimed to quantify the prevalence of complications during transport in PP, compared to transports with veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) or in the supine position (SP). Methods We performed a retrospective, single center cohort study in Lyon university hospital, France. We included patients ≥ 16 years with ARDS (Berlin definition) transported to an ARDS referral center between 01/12/2016 and 31/12/2021. We compared patients transported in PP, to those transported in SP without VV-ECMO, and those transported with VV-ECMO (in SP), by a multidisciplinary and specialized medical transport team, including an emergency physician and an intensivist. The primary outcome was the rate of transport-related complications (hypoxemia, hypotension, cardiac arrest, cannula or tube dislodgement) in each study groups, compared using a Fisher test. Results One hundred thirty-four patients were enrolled (median PaO2/FiO2 70 [58–82] mmHg), of which 11 (8%) were transported in PP, 44 (33%) with VV-ECMO, and 79 (59%) in SP. The most frequent risk factor for ARDS in the PP group was bacterial pneumonitis, and viral pneumonitis in the other 2 groups. Transport-related complications occurred in 36% (n = 4) of transports in PP, compared to 39% (n = 30) in SP and 14% (n = 6) with VV-ECMO, respectively (p = 0.33). VV-ECMO implantation after transport was not different between SP and PP patients (n = 7, 64% vs. n = 31, 39%, p = 0.19). Conclusions In the context of a specialized multi-disciplinary ARDS transport team, transport-related complication rates were similar between patients transported in PP and SP, while there was a trend of lower rates in patients transported with VV-ECMO.
ISSN:1471-227X