Increased extravascular lung water index (EVLWI) reflects rapid inflammatory oedema and mortality in COVID-19 associated ARDS

Sebastian Rasch, Paul Schmidle, Senguel Sancak, Alexander Herner, Christina Huberle, Dominik Schulz, Ulrich Mayr, Jochen Schneider, Christoph Spinner, Fabian Geisler, Roland M. Schmid, Tobias Lahmer, Wolfgang Huber

Like Comment

Received date: 28th September 2020

OBJECTIVE: Nearly 5 % of the patients with COVID-19 develop an acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Extravascular lung water index (EVLWI) is a marker of pulmonary oedema which is associated with mortality in ARDS. In this study we evaluate whether EVLWI is higher in patients with COVID-19 associated ARDS as compared to controls and whether EVLWI has the potential to monitor disease progression. METHODS: From the day of intubation, EVLWI, cardiac function were monitored by transpulmonary thermodilution in n=25 patients with COVID-19 and compared to a control group of 49 non-COVID-19 ARDS-patients. RESULTS: EVLWI in COVID-19-patients was noticeably elevated and significantly higher than in the control group (17 (11-38) vs. 11 (6-26) mL/kg; p<0.001). High pulmonary vascular permeability index values (2.9 (1.0-5.2) versus 1.9 (1.0-5.2); p=0.003) suggest inflammatory oedema. By contrast, the cardiac parameters SVI, GEF and GEDVI were comparable. High EVLWI values were associated with viral persistence, prolonged intensive care treatment and mortality (23.2±6.7% vs. 30.3±6.0%, p=0.025). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the control group, COVID-19 results in markedly elevated EVLWI-values in patients with ARDS. EVLWI reflects a non-cardiogenic pulmonary oedema in COVID-19 associated ARDS and could serve as parameter to monitor ARDS progression.

Read in full at medRxiv.

This is an abstract of a preprint hosted on a preprint server, which is currently undergoing peer review at Scientific Reports. The findings have yet to be thoroughly evaluated, nor has a decision on ultimate publication been made. Therefore, the results reported should not be considered conclusive, and these findings should not be used to inform clinical practice, or public health policy, or be promoted as verified information.

Scientific Reports

Nature Research, Springer Nature