Chest
Volume 130, Issue 3, September 2006, Pages 724-729
Journal home page for Chest

Original Research: Critical Care Medicine
Etiology and Outcomes of Pulmonary and Extrapulmonary Acute Lung Injury/ARDS in a Respiratory ICU in North India

https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.130.3.724Get rights and content

Objective

Outcomes in patients with ARDS/acute lung injury (ALI) may be dependent on the underlying cause. We describe the case mix, clinical behavior, and outcomes of patients with ALI/ARDS resulting from pulmonary causes (ALI/ARDSp) and extrapulmonary causes (ALI/ARDSexp).

Design

Retrospective study conducted between January 2001 and June 2005.

Setting

Respiratory ICU (RICU) of a tertiary care hospital in northern India.

Patients

All patients fulfilling the criteria for ALI/ARDS and requiring mechanical ventilation for > 24 h.

Measurements and results

Of the 180 patients (ARDS, 140 patients; ALI, 40 patients), 123 patients had ALI/ARDSp, whereas 57 patients had ALI/ARDSexp. The most common cause of ALI/ARDSp was infective pneumonia, whereas the most common cause of ALI/ARDSexp was sepsis. At ICU admission, although patients with ALI/ARDSexp were sicker than those with ALI/ARDSp, there was no difference between the two groups of patients in the development of new organ dysfunction/failure (δ sequential organ failure assessment [SOFA] scores) or the time to develop the first organ dysfunction/failure (assessed by SOFA scores). The median length of RICU stay was similar in the two groups (5 days [interquartile range (IQR), 6 days] vs 5 days [IQR, 9.5 days], respectively, in patients with ALI/ARDSp and ALI/ARDSexp; p = 0.4). The hospital mortality rate was 47.8% and was not significantly different between the two groups (ALI/ARDSp group, 43.1%; ALI/ARDSexp group, 57.9%; p = 0.06). Multivariate analysis showed the following risk factors for death in the ICU: female gender (odds ratio [OR], 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25 to 0.94); SOFA scores (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.3); and δSOFA scores (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.41). There was no significant effect of the category of ARDS on outcome (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 0.8 to 3.2).

Conclusions

Although patients with ALI/ARDSexp are sicker on ICU admission, the underlying cause of ARDS does not affect the length of ICU stay or hospital survival time.

Section snippets

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective study conducted in the RICU of the Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research between January 2001 and June 2005. All data in the RICU are entered prospectively into a computer program that is specifically designed for this purpose, with a continuous process of monitoring its completeness and correcting entries. Data are registered on RICU admission and every 24 h thereafter, using the lowest daily values for all variables of interest. Day 0 is defined as

RESULTS

During the study period, a total of 209 patients were admitted to the RICU with a diagnosis of ALI/ARDS; 180 patients (ARDS, 140 patients; ALI, 40 patients; ALI/ARDSp, 123 patients; ALI/ARDSexp, 57 patients) were included for further analysis. Twenty-nine patients were excluded from the analysis for one of the following reasons: survival for < 24 h; ambiguity in the diagnosis and etiology of lung injury; and the presence of insufficient information. The most common cause of ALI/ARDSp was

DISCUSSION

Only a few studies have investigated the prevalence of ALI/ARDSp and ALI/ARDSexp and the mortality of patients with those conditions. However, in the majority of available studies, as in the present study, the prevalence of ARDSp was higher compared to ARDSexp,3, 12, 13 although, in the most recent retrospective analysis of patients enrolled in the ARDS Network trial14 of low-tidal volume ventilation, roughly an equal proportion of ARDSp and ARDSexp patients were identified. In two studies,15,

REFERENCES (22)

  • MR Suchyta et al.

    The adult respiratory distress syndrome: a report of survival and modifying factors

    Chest

    (1992)
  • MD Diodato et al.

    Gender differences in the inflammatory response and survival following haemorrhage and subsequent sepsis

    Cytokine

    (2001)
  • SK Jindal et al.

    Adult respiratory distress syndrome in the tropics

    Clin Chest Med

    (2002)
  • LB Ware et al.

    The acute respiratory distress syndrome

    N Engl J Med

    (2000)
  • P Pelosi et al.

    Pulmonary and extrapulmonary forms of acute respiratory distress syndrome

    Semin Respir Crit Care Med

    (2001)
  • L Gattinoni et al.

    Acute respiratory distress syndrome caused by pulmonary and extrapulmonary disease: different syndromes?

    Am J Respir Crit Care Med

    (1998)
  • P Pelosi et al.

    Pulmonary and extrapulmonary acute respiratory distress syndrome are different

    Eur Respir J Suppl

    (2003)
  • G Suntharalingam et al.

    Influence of direct and indirect etiology on acute outcome and 6-month functional recovery in acute respiratory distress syndrome

    Crit Care Med

    (2001)
  • SJ Kim et al.

    Recovery from lung injury in survivors of acute respiratory distress syndrome: difference between pulmonary and extrapulmonary subtypes

    Intensive Care Med

    (2004)
  • D Gupta et al.

    Assessment of factors predicting outcome of acute respiratory distress syndrome in North India

    Respirology

    (2001)
  • GR Bernard et al.

    Report of the American-European consensus conference on ARDS: definitions, mechanisms, relevant outcomes and clinical trial coordination: The Consensus Committee

    Intensive Care Med

    (1994)
  • Cited by (85)

    • Epidemiology, lung mechanics and outcomes of ARDS: A comparison between pregnant and non-pregnant subjects

      2019, Journal of Critical Care
      Citation Excerpt :

      Depending on the severity of ARDS, the hospital mortality varies between 35% and 46% [2]. Based on the mechanism of injury, ARDS has been classified as pulmonary (injury to the alveolar epithelium) or extrapulmonary (injury to the vascular endothelium) [3,4]. Although the mortality is similar in both forms of ARDS, they behave differently, with the latter responding better to higher positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) [5].

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    The authors have reported to the ACCP that no significant conflicts of interest exist with any companies/organizations whose products or services may be discussed in this article.

    Reproduction of this article is prohibited without written permission from the American College of Chest Physicians (www.chestjournal.org/misc/reprints.shtml).

    View full text