Diaphragmatic respiratory effort during mechanical ventilation is an important determinant of patient outcome, but direct measurement of diaphragmatic contractility requires specialized instrumentation and technical expertise. We sought to determine whether routinely collected clinical variables can predict diaphragmatic contractility and stratify the risk of diaphragm atrophy.
METHODS:
We conducted a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study on diaphragm ultrasound in mechanically ventilated subjects. Clinical variables, such as breathing frequency, ventilator settings, and blood gases, were recorded longitudinally. Machine learning techniques were used to identify variables predicting diaphragm contractility and stratifying the risk of diaphragm atrophy (> 10% decrease in thickness from baseline). Performance of the variables was evaluated in mixed-effects logistic regression and random-effects tree models using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.
RESULTS:
Measurements were available for 761 study days in 191 subjects, of whom 73 (38%) developed diaphragm atrophy. No routinely collected clinical variable, alone or in combination, could accurately predict either diaphragm contractility or the development of diaphragm atrophy (model area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.63–0.75). The risk of diaphragm atrophy was not significantly different according to the presence or absence of patient-triggered breaths (38.3% vs 38.6%; odds ratio 1.01, 95% CI 0.05–2.03). Diaphragm thickening fraction < 15% during either of the first 2 d of the study was associated with a higher risk of atrophy (44.6% vs 26.1%; odds ratio 2.28, 95% CI 1.05–4.95).
CONCLUSIONS:
Diaphragmatic contractility and the risk of diaphragm atrophy could not be reliably determined from routinely collected clinical variables and ventilator settings. A single measurement of diaphragm thickening fraction measured within 48 h of initiating mechanical ventilation can be used to stratify the risk of diaphragm atrophy during mechanical ventilation.
YoshidaT, TorsaniV, GomesS, De SantisRR, BeraldoMA, CostaEL, et al. Spontaneous effort causes occult pendelluft during mechanical ventilation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2013; 188(12):1420-1427.
ReidWD, HuangJ, BrysonS, WalkerDC, BelcastroAN. Diaphragm injury and myofibrillar structure induced by resistive loading. J Appl Physiol (1985), 1994; 76(1):176-184.
4.
LaghiF, D'AlfonsoN, TobinMJ. Pattern of recovery from diaphragmatic fatigue over 24 hours. J Appl Physiol (1985), 1995; 79(2):539-546.
5.
Orozco-LeviM, LloretaJ, MinguellaJ, SerranoS, BroquetasJM, GeaJ. Injury of the human diaphragm associated with exertion and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2001; 164(9):1734-1739.
6.
BergerD, BloechlingerS, von HaehlingS, DoehnerW, TakalaJ, Z'GraggenWJ, et al. Dysfunction of respiratory muscles in critically ill patients on the intensive care unit. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle, 2016; 7(4):403-412.
7.
DresM, DemouleA. Diaphragm dysfunction during weaning from mechanical ventilation: an underestimated phenomenon with clinical implications. Crit Care, 2018; 22(1):73.
8.
GoligherEC, FanE, HerridgeMS, MurrayA, VoronaS, BraceD, et al. Evolution of diaphragm thickness during mechanical ventilation. impact of inspiratory effort. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2015; 192(9):1080-1088.
9.
LevineS, NguyenT, TaylorN, FrisciaME, BudakMT, RothenbergP, et al. Rapid disuse atrophy of diaphragm fibers in mechanically ventilated humans. N Engl J Med, 2008; 358(13):1327-1335.
10.
KimWY, SuhHJ, HongSB, KohY, LimCM. Diaphragm dysfunction assessed by ultrasonography: influence on weaning from mechanical ventilation. Crit Care Med, 2011; 39(12):2627-2630.
11.
GoligherEC, DresM, FanE, RubenfeldGD, ScalesDC, HerridgeMS, et al. Mechanical ventilation-induced diaphragm atrophy strongly impacts clinical outcomes. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2018; 197(2):204-213.
12.
BellaniG, LaffeyJG, PhamT, FanE, BrochardL, EstebanA, et al. Epidemiology, patterns of care, and mortality for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome in intensive care units in 50 countries. JAMA, 2016; 315(8):788-800.
13.
AmatoMB, MeadeMO, SlutskyAS, BrochardL, CostaEL, SchoenfeldDA, et al. Driving pressure and survival in the acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med, 2015; 372(8):747-755.
14.
AkoumianakiE, MaggioreSM, ValenzaF, BellaniG, JubranA, LoringSH, et al. The application of esophageal pressure measurement in patients with respiratory failure. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2014; 189(5):520-531.
15.
GoligherEC, LaghiF, DetskyME, FariasP, MurrayA, BraceD, et al. Measuring diaphragm thickness with ultrasound in mechanically ventilated patients: feasibility, reproducibility and validity. Intensive Care Med, 2015; 41(4):734.
16.
VincentJL, de MendoncaA, CantraineF, MorenoR, TakalaJ, SuterPM, et al. Use of the SOFA score to assess the incidence of organ dysfunction/failure in intensive care units: results of a multicenter, prospective study. Working group on “sepsis-related problems” of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Crit Care Med, 1998; 26(11):1793-1800.
17.
SesslerCN, GosnellMS, GrapMJ, BrophyGM, O'NealPV, KeaneKA, et al. The Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale: validity and reliability in adult intensive care unit patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2002; 166(10):1338-1344.
18.
BastosPG, SunX, WagnerDP, WuAW, KnausWA. Glasgow Coma Scale score in the evaluation of outcome in the intensive care unit: findings from the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III study. Crit Care Med, 1993; 21(10):1459-1465.
19.
BrowerRG, MatthayMA, MorrisA, SchoenfeldD, ThompsonBT, 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(18):1301-1308.
20.
KursaMB, RudnickiWR. Feature selection with the Boruta package. J Stat Softw, 2010; 36(11):13.
21.
BatesD, MaechlerM, BolkerB, WalkerS, ChristensenRHB, SingmannH, et al. lme4: linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. Available at: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lme4/lme4.pdf. Accessed October 26, 2020.
SelaRJ, SimonoffJS. RE-EM trees: a data mining approach for longitudinal and clustered data. Machine Learning, 2011; 86(2):169-207.
24.
KuhnM. Building predictive models in R using the caret package. J Stat Softw, 2008; 28(5):1-26.
25.
RobinX, TurckN, HainardA, TibertiN, LisacekF, SanchezJC, et al. pROC: an open-source package for R and S+ to analyze and compare ROC curves. BMC Bioinformatics, 2011; 12:77.
26.
EugsterMJ, HothornT, LeischF. Exploratory and inferential analysis of benchmark experiments. 2008. Department of Statistics: Technical Reports, No. 30. Available at: https://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/4134. Accessed October 26, 2020.
27.
MariniJJ, RodriguezRM, LambV. The inspiratory workload of patient-initiated mechanical ventilation. Am Rev Respir Dis, 1986; 134(5):902-909.
28.
TeliasI, JunhasavasdikulD, RittayamaiN, PiquilloudL, ChenL, FergusonND, et al. Airway Occlusion Pressure As an Estimate of Respiratory Drive and Inspiratory Effort during Assisted Ventilation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2020; 201(9):1086-1098.
29.
VassilakopoulosT, ZakynthinosS, RoussosC. The tension-time index and the frequency/tidal volume ratio are the major pathophysiologic determinants of weaning failure and success. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 1998; 158(2):378-385.
30.
AkoumianakiE, LyazidiA, ReyN, MatamisD, Perez-MartinezN, GiraudR, et al. Mechanical ventilation-induced reverse-triggered breaths: a frequently unrecognized form of neuromechanical coupling. Chest, 2013; 143(4):927-938.
31.
BellaniG, MauriT, CoppadoroA, GrasselliG, PatronitiN, SpadaroS, et al. Estimation of patient's inspiratory effort from the electrical activity of the diaphragm. Crit Care Med, 2013; 41(6):1483-1491.
32.
MariniJJ, SmithTC, LambV. Estimation of inspiratory muscle strength in mechanically ventilated patients: the measurement of maximal inspiratory pressure. J Crit Care, 1986; 1(1):32-38.
33.
LavenezianaP, AlbuquerqueA, AlivertiA, BabbT, BarreiroE, DresM, et al. ERS statement on respiratory muscle testing at rest and during exercise. European Respiratory Journal, 2019; 53(6).
34.
VivierE, Mekontso DessapA, DimassiS, VargasF, LyazidiA, ThilleAW, et al. Diaphragm ultrasonography to estimate the work of breathing during non-invasive ventilation. Intensive Care Med, 2012; 38(5):796-803.
35.
GottesmanE, McCoolFD. Ultrasound evaluation of the paralyzed diaphragm. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 1997; 155(5):1570-1574.
36.
BertoniM, TeliasI, UrnerM, LongM, Del SorboL, FanE, et al. A novel non-invasive method to detect excessively high respiratory effort and dynamic transpulmonary driving pressure during mechanical ventilation. Crit Care, 2019; 23(1):346.
37.
DiNinoE, GartmanEJ, SethiJM, McCoolFD. Diaphragm ultrasound as a predictor of successful extubation from mechanical ventilation. Thorax, 2014; 69(5):423-427.
38.
van HarenF, PhamT, BrochardL, BellaniG, LaffeyJ, DresM, et al. Spontaneous Breathing in Early Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Insights From the Large Observational Study to UNderstand the Global Impact of Severe Acute Respiratory FailurE Study. Crit Care Med, 2019; 47(2):229-238.
39.
ZambonM, BeccariaP, MatsunoJ, GemmaM, FratiE, ColomboS, et al. Mechanical ventilation and diaphragmatic atrophy in critically ill patients: an ultrasound study. Crit Care Med, 2016; 44(7):1347-1352.
40.
DubéBP, DresM, MayauxJ, DemiriS, SimilowskiT, DemouleA. Ultrasound evaluation of diaphragm function in mechanically ventilated patients: comparison to phrenic stimulation and prognostic implications. Thorax, 2017; 72(9):811-818.
