ISICEM and steroids in severe pneumonia

ISICEM has begun – lots of interesting papers being presented, can follow on Twitter with #ISICEM23 [https://twitter.com/hashtag/ISICEM23?src=hashtag_click].

Some studies of high interest: anticoagulation for COVID, ravulizumab for COVID, feeding in shock, and more:  https://twitter.com/tscquizzato/status/1638128616713101313

And of special interest – CAPE COD – are steroids back in for severe pneumonia? Out in NEJM today: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2215145?query=featured_home

TL;DR – 800 patients with severe pneumonia admitted to the ICU randomized to 200mg daily hydrocortisone vs placebo; reduced mortality (6.2% vs 11.9%), higher ICU discharge, less intubation (18% vs 29.5%)! Note those with septic shock were excluded (probably because they would receive hydrocort 50q6 anyway?).

Especially beneficial in subgroup with high CRP (makes sense)

Farkas already has his take up here: https://emcrit.org/pulmcrit/cape-cod/

Trachs 101 and Education Research Award!

Fantastic Core IM podcast on trach pearls featuring our very own Tim Rowe!
https://www.coreimpodcast.com/2023/03/08/trac/

Including this amazing figure to demystify trachs!

Source:  https://twitter.com/COREIMpodcast/status/1633443908536483842

Congrats to Tim and Kaitlyn on the APCCMPD Education Research Award for the massive hemoptysis sim!
Image

ILD Round-up 3-3-23

Last week, Anthony presented a patient with a reduction in DLCO and mild restrictive spirometric defect on PFTs CT scan showed questionable interstitial changes. We discussed further evaluation and management of ILAs. 

How do we define Interstitial Lung Abnormalities (ILAs) (1)? 

  1. incidentally identified  
  1. non-dependent interstitial changes (reticulation, groundglass, traction bronchiectasis, honeycombing, non-emphysematous cysts) involving  
  1. at least 5% of a lung zone  
  1. in patients for whom ILD is not clinically suspected 

Mimickers of ILAs include dependent atelectasis, interstitial edema, aspiration (GGOs, TiB opacities) and others 

Image: focal paraspinal fibrosis (arrow) in contact with spinal osteophytes, a mimicker of ILAs

 

How common are ILAs, and what is their significance? 

  • Large population-based (MESA, AGES, FHS, Nagano) and smoking/lung ca. screening (ECLIPSE, NLST, COPDGene, MILD) cohorts found that ILAs are present in 4-10% of individuals screened. 
  • Mean age of scan with ILA varies between 62-78 
  • Progression to ILD observed in 20% at 2 years, and 45-65% at 4-6 years (depending on study, not all cohorts assessed for progression) 
  • Mortality risk associations suggested in several studies, with RR between 1.3-2.7 (95% CI >1, depending on study, not all cohorts assessed for mortality) 
  • Risk factors for ILAs are similar to ILD: increased age, male sex, tobacco smoke exposure 

Table: clinical risk factors for ILD progression (2)

 

 

Can ILAs be further categorized, and what are implications of these categories? 

Non-subpleural: usually non-progressive and not associated with increase in mortality 

 

 

Subpleural non-fibrotic: sub pleural distribution associated with higher rates of mortality

 

 

 

Subpleural fibrotic: lower zone predominant, reticulation, traction bronchiectasis associated with 6x increased risk of progression   

 

How should we manage patients with ILAs? 

An algorithmic approach is described in the image below:  

 

Takeaway points:

  • ILAs are (1) incidentally found (2) non-dependent (3) involving at least 5% of lung zone and (4) in patients for whom ILD is not suspected
  • ILAs are present in 4-10% of patients screened, and typically found in 6th/7th decade of life, and are associated with increased mortality (RR 1.3-2.7)
  • Progression is 20% at 2 years, 45-65% at 5 years 
  • Risk of progression is higher in subpleural location and if reticulations/fibrosis are present

Sources: 

  1. PMID: 32649920 / DOI: 10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30168-5
  2.  PMID: 34374589 /  DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2021204367 

 

 

Spotlight on CHI-PAP!

CHI-PAP

We wanted to spotlight the great work fellowship-graduate Dr. Justin Fiala has been doing with CHI-PAP, an initiative to evaluate and treat sleep-related concerns. CommunityHealth is a free clinic that has multidisciplinary care under one roof. Dr. Fiala has built an amazing program that takes advantage of refurbished home sleep testing devices and donated and recycled/refurbished sleep devices and equipment to bring comprehensive sleep health to the community.

Visit their website here for more details: https://chi-pap.org/

Amazing work, Dr. Fiala!

Justin Anthony Fiala, MD | Northwestern Medicine

Morning Report 3-1-23

Today in Pulmonary Report, the Emily Olson series continues with a case of cystic lung disease. Today, Emily described the management of a young woman with recurrent secondary spontaneous pneumothorax, found to have cystic lung disease.

First-year PCCM fellow Emily Olson (@EmilyOlsonMD)

Before we dive into today’s report, we encourage you to take this opportunity for some retrieval practice from prior NU PCCM blog posts:

For review, here are the blog posts associated with polls above

  1. A case of cystic lung disease in patient with Sjogren’s syndrome from ILD Roundup last July.
  2. Management of secondary spontaneous pneumothorax with delayed resolution (Leak for a week!) from Emily’s Morning Report last August
  3. A case of secondary spontaneous pneumothorax from cystic lung disease from Ale’s Morning Report last September

 

Alright! Now that the knowledge is fresh, let’s dive in! First, we discussed definitional criteria and a differential diagnosis (1) of cystic lung disease:

Another outstanding quick reference on this topic is Nick Mark’s OnePager (2):

Emily outlined the pragmatic 5-step approach described by Raoof et al.

Further refinement of differential involves considering the apicobasilar gradient of illness:

Emily’s case presented a bit of a diagnostic dilemma – LAM was clinically suspected but VEGF testing performed and unrevealing. Patient ultimately proceeded to VATS resection of a peripheral cyst/bulla, but pathology was inconclusive. This brought up an important discussion point – does it really matter if we know that cause?

Revealing cause of cystic lung disease may have important management implications for our patients:

  • Genetic inheritance of cystic lung diseases and multi-system illnesses associated. Genetic counseling/sequencing may be indicated
  • Differential considerations for cystic lung diseases include metastatic malignancies and certain infectious processes with specific management

 

Dr. Russell also brought up the higher risk of malignancy in patients with Birt-Hogg-Dube (BHD) specifically – particularly colorectal cancer.  Recall also from Ale’s morning report – 7x risk of RCC, screening with annual ultrasound in US. BHD, which follows an AD inheritance pattern, may be confirmed by genetic testing revealing a mutation in the FLCN gene, although testing may not be covered by insurance.

Dr. Singer also mentioned the NEJM study (3) that found sirolimus to be associated with stabilization of lung function and improved quality of life in patients with Lymphangioleiomyomatosis (LAM).

Some take-home points:

Thanks for an outstanding discussion, Emily!

Sources:

  1. PMID: 31704148 / DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2019.10.017
  2. https://onepagericu.com/cystic-lung-disease
  3. PMID: 21410393 / DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1100391

 

Morning Report 2-22-23

Today in report, Emily @EmilyOlsonMD discussed a great case  an individual with incidentally discovered pulmonary sequestration who had presented with progressive weakness, and for whom there was concern for malignancy & paraneoplastic syndrome.

First, we discussed a radiographic differential diagnosis:

Emily next took us ALL the way back to medical school embyrology to discuss the two mechanisms of sequestration (intralobar and extralobar)

 

How does the natural history of intralobar vs extralobar sequestration vary?

Emily’s patient ended up undergoing IR embolization before eventually having a resection of their pulmonary sequestration. Fortunately, the explanted lung tissue did not show malignancy.

Here’s some takeaways from her discussion:

Thanks, Emily!!

ILD Round Up 2-19-23

In last week’s ILD conference, we discussed a patient with seropositive RA for whom RA-ILD was suspected.  

First, a quick reminder of ILD patterns associated with rheumatoid arthritis (1) from July ILD Round Up: 

Dr. Rishi Agrawal mentioned that this patient’s HRCT pattern was most consistent with UIP; however, given this patient’s history of connective tissue disease, “exuberant honeycombing” may be expected, and the lack of any honeycombing was somewhat atypical.  

What characteristics are commonly associated with a UIP pattern in patients with CT-ILD, and how might they differ from UIP in a patient with IPF? 

A 2018 study (2) looked at patients with UIP with either a diagnosis of IPF or CTD-ILD. Exuberant honeycombing was found in only 6% of IPF patients compared to 22% of patients with CTD-ILD.  

While we’re on the subject…what is exuberant honeycombing? 

Exuberant honeycombing (3) refers to extensive honeycomb-like cyst formation within the lungs comprising >70% of the fibrotic portions of the lungs.

Finally, we discussed the patient’s prior treatment regimen, which included methotrexate (MTX).  

What is the likelihood of methotrexate-associated interstitial lung disease in patients with RA-ILD on methotrexate? 

A case-control study (4) looking at the association between MTX exposure and ILD (n=1083 patients)  found an inverse correlation between MTX exposure and RA-ILD (OR 0.46: 0.24-0.90, p=0.02). Another meta-analysis (5) of 30 studies with 15000 total patients found no association (RR 1.02: 0.73-1.44) for non-infectious adverse respiratory events with MTX use.  

Dr. Carrie Richardson noted that many patients with more severe RA will have already failed therapy with methotrexate for their articular symptoms, which may confound anecdotal reports of ILD associated with MTX use.  

Dr. Jane Dematte also mentioned the distinct entity of MTX associated hypersensitivity. This association is well-recognized, with frequency level 5 from Pneumotox profile corresponding to >200 reported cases in the literature.  

The actual frequency of occurrence depends on definitional criteria (see figure below) but is likely <1%. Below, see the commonly used Carson Criteria for diagnosis of MTX associated pneumonitis (MTX-P). 

Sources: 

1. DOI: 10.1183/09059180.00008014 / PMID: 25726549 

2. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.17.18384 / PMID: 29140119 

3. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejro.2022.100419 / PMID: 35445144 

4. DOI: 10.1183/13993003.00337-2020 / PMID: 32646919 

5. DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/kez337 / PMID: 31504978 

 

“Outcomes associated with corticosteroid dosage in critically ill patients with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease,” AJRCCM, 2016

“Outcomes associated with corticosteroid dosage in critically ill patients with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease,” AJRCCM, 2016, University of Colorado

Question: Is high-dose or low-dose systemic corticosteroid therapy better for intensive care unit (ICU) patients with acute exacerbations of COPD (AE-COPD)?

 Study Type: Retrospective cohort study using a large national quality and health care use database.

Study Population: Patients >40 years of age admitted to an ICU and treated with systemic corticosteroids by hospital day 2 for AE-COPD.  Patients excluded if steroid dose >1g/day methylpred, OSH tx, re-admission within 30 days of a prior discharge, solid organ transplant, or presence of pulmonary embolism, pneumothorax, shock, or antifungal therapy.

Study Groups: Patients divided into high-dose corticosteroids (>240 mg/day methylpred) and lower-dose corticosteroids (≤240 mg/day methylpred, i.e., 60 mg Q6 hrs or less).

Primary Outcome: In-hospital mortality

Results: 17,239 patients included in analysis.  After propensity score matching, there was no difference in the primary outcome between groups.  Patients in the lower-dose group had better clinical outcomes (less time on mechanical ventilation, less time in the ICU, less time in the hospital) and less steroid-related complications (decreased insulin requirements and fewer fungal infections).

Caveats: Retrospective design, association ≠ causation, and potential for unmeasured confounding.

Take-home Point: High-dose systemic corticosteroid therapy does not improve outcomes for critically ill patients with AE-COPD and is associated with a higher rate of steroid-related complications.

The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (sepsis-3)

“The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (sepsis-3),” JAMA 315: 801, 2016, SCCM sepsis definitions task force

Intro:

  • initial definitions of sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock from 1991; defined severe sepsis as sepsis complicated by organ dysfx which could progress to septic shock, defined as hypotension despite adequate fluid resuscitation; revisited in 2001
  • the definitions of sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock have remained largely unchanged for more than 2 decades

Process of developing new definitions:

  • recognizing the need to reexamine current definitions, the euro society of critical care medicine and the society of critical care medicine convened a task force (TF) of 19 experts in critical care, ID, surgery, and pulmonology (no EM) in jan 2014
  • existing definitions were revisited in light of an enhanced appreciation of the pathobiology and the availability of large EMR databases and pt cohorts
  • expert consensus process forged agreement on updated definitions and the criteria to be tested in the clinical arena
  • the agreement between potential clinical criteria and the ability of the criteria to predict outcomes (eg ICU admission, mortality) were then tested in multiple large EMR databases
  • systematic lit review/metaanalysis and delphi consensus methods were also used for the definition and clinical criteria describing septic shock
  • when compiled, the TF recommendations were circulated to major international societies and other relevant bodies for peer review and endorsing (a total of 31 endorsing societies) (again, no EM)

 Challenges and opportunities:

  • because no gold standard diagnostic tests exist for sepsis, the TF sought definitions and supporting clinical criteria that were clear and fulfilled multiple domains of usefulness and validity
  • the original conceptualization of sepsis as infection + ³2 SIRS criteria focused solely on inflammatory excess; sepsis is now recognized to involve early activation of both pro- and anti-inflammatory responses, along with major modifications in nonimmunologic pathways such as cardiovascular, neuronal, autonomic, hormonal, bioenergetic, metabolic, and coagulation, all of which have prognostic significance; a broader perspective also emphasizes the significant biological and clinical heterogeneity in affected individuals
  • the current ³2 SIRS criteria to identify sepsis was unanimously considered by the TF to be unhelpful
  • the “sequential organ failure assessment” (SOFA) score looks at severity of organ dysfx via the following variables: P/F ratio (resp), platelets (coag), bili (liver), BP (cardiovascular), GCS (neuro), creat and UO (renal); a higher SOFA score is associated with increased mortality, but outside the critical care community the score is not well known + cumbersome to use
  • multiple definitions for septic shock are currently in use resulting in significant heterogeneity in reported mortality
  • the public needs an understandable definition of sepsis and health care providers require improved clinical prompts and diagnostic approaches to facilitate earlier identification and an accurate quantification of the burden of sepsis

Results/recommendations:

Definition of sepsis:

  • sepsis is defined as life-threatening organ dysfx caused by a dysregulated host response to infection
  • under this definition (“life-threatening organ dysfx”), the term “severe sepsis” becomes superfluous

Clinical criteria to identify pts with sepsis:

  • the TF evaluated which clinical criteria best identified pts most likely to have sepsis; this objective was achieved by interrogating large datasets of hospitalized pts with presumed infection, assessing agreement among existing scores of inflammation (SIRS) or organ dysfx (SOFA), and delineating their correlation with subsequent outcomes; in addition, multivariable regression was used to explore the performance of 21 bedside and lab criteria proposed by the 2001 TF
  • the EMR included 150,000 pts with suspected infection (from 12 hosps within the univ of pittsburgh system); two outcomes – ICU stay ³3 days and mortality – were used to assess predictive validity
  • for ICU pts, a change in SOFA score ³2 from baseline was superior to SIRS criteria; the TF recommends the use of SOFA score ³2 from baseline to identify life-threatening organ dysfx and, thus, sepsis
  • for non-ICU pts, the TF found that 2 or more of the following clinical variables – altered mental status, syst BP £100, and RR ³22 – offered good predictive validity; this new measure is termed qSOFA (for quick SOFA) and provides simple bedside criteria to identify life-threatening organ dysfx and, thus, sepsis; the TF recommends that qSOFA criteria be used to prompt clinicians to further investigate organ dysfx, to initiate or escalate therapy as appropriate, and to consider referral to critical care specialists
  • thus, for ER pts, the TF recommends the following for identification of pts with sepsis: ³2 of the qSOFA criteria: altered MS, syst BP £100, RR ³22

Definition of septic shock:

  • septic shock is a subset of sepsis in which underlying circulatory and cellular metabolic abnormalities are profound enough to substantially increase mortality

Clinical criteria to identify septic shock:

  • 3 variables were identified to test in cohort studies – MAP <65, lactate >2, and need for vasopressor(s) to maintain MAP ³65 after volume resuscitation
  • the first database interrogated was the surviving sepsis campaign’s international multicenter registry; a total of 20,000 septic pts; the mortality for septic pts with all 3 variables was >40%
  • these same 3 variables were then used to interrogate 2 unrelated large EMR datasets – univ of pittsburgh (12 hosps, 6,000 pts) and kaiser (20 hosps, 54,000 pts); the mortality for septic pts with all 3 variables was 35-55%
  • thus, the TF recommends the following criteria for identification of pts with septic shock: MAP <65, lactate >2, and need for vasopressor(s) to maintain MAP ³65 after volume resuscitation

Controversies – lactate levels:

  • because lactate offered no meaningful change in the predictive validity beyond ³2 of the qSOFA criteria in the identification of pts with sepsis, the TF could not justify adding the complexity/cost of lactates alongside these simple bedside criteria
  • the TF recommendations should not, however, constrain the monitoring of lactate as an indicator of illness severity or as a guide to therapeutic response
  • some TF members suggested that elevated lactate represents an important marker of “covert shock” in the absence of hypotension

Implications:

  • simple clinical criteria (qSOFA) that identify pts with sepsis (ie pts with evidence of infection who are likely to have a prolonged ICU course +/- death) have been developed and validated
  • there is potential conflict with current organ dysfx scoring systems, early warning scores, ongoing research studies, and pathway developments

“Editorial: new definitions for sepsis and septic shock: continuing evolution but with much still to be done,” wake forest

  • the TF assessed the predictive validity of SOFA, SIRS, and qSOFA in a primary cohort that included 150,000 pts with suspected sepsis and a confirmatory analysis that included 700,000 pt encounters at 156 US and non-US hosps
  • for identifying pts with sepsis: the investigators found that in the ICU the best predictive value was found with change in SOFA score >2 from baseline; in non-ICU settings, the best predictive value was found with the qSOFA score
  • for identifying pts with septic shock: the TF conducted a systematic review and metaanalysis of 92 studies informing a delphi process that created the new definition, then tested the variables identified by the delphi process in cohort studies using datasets from the surviving sepsis registry, univ of pittsburgh hosps, and kaiser hosps
  • according to the new recommendations:
    • sepsis is now identified by evidence of infection + life-threatening organ dysfx, clinically characterized by an acute change in the SOFA score ³2 from baseline (ICU pts) or ³2 of the 3 clinical variables of the qSOFA score (nonICU pts)
    • septic shock is now identified by MAP <65, lactate >2, and the need for vasopressor(s) to maintain MAP >65 after volume resuscitation
  • there is no longer any mention of the SIRS criteria (HR >90, RR >20, T >38° or <36°, WBC >12K or bands >10%)
  • there remain concerns with the quality of the information used to generate the updated criteria
  • regarding the new qSOFA score: because this score was retrospectively derived from databases that had substantial gaps in clinical info for pts treated outside ICUs, qSOFA will require prospective real-world validation before it should enter routine clinical practice

Pulmonary morning report

Patient in her 60s, former smoker 40py, with abnormal LDCT imaging. Some dyspnea but thought to be related to significant weight gain during pandemic.

Special shoutout to Dr. Agrawal’s Youtube channel and MIPs!

The case had a small endobronchial lesion on CT. We reviewed the differential for endobronchial lesions:

 

And focused on trahceobronchial tumors, which are rare, 0.6% of pulmonary tumors. (With a fun jeopardy matching series of slides, not captured in this post.)

DIPNECH – associated with bronchial carcinoid, consider in asthma patient with endobronchial abnormality.

Thanks for a great review and a fun interactive session, Dr. Rowe!

Timothy Rowe, MD, Pulmonary and Critical Care