Respiratory failure is a significant concern in neuromuscular diseases (NMDs). This CHEST guideline examines the literature on the respiratory management of patients with NMD to provide evidence-based recommendations.
An expert panel conducted a systematic review addressing the respiratory management of NMD and applied the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach for assessing the certainty of the evidence and formulating and grading recommendations. A modified Delphi technique was used to reach a consensus on the recommendations.
Based on 128 studies, the panel generated 15 graded recommendations, one good practice statement, and one consensus-based statement.
Evidence of best practices for respiratory management in NMD is limited and is based primarily on observational data in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. The panel found that pulmonary function testing every 6 months may be beneficial and may be used to initiate noninvasive ventilation (NIV) when clinically indicated. An individualized approach to NIV settings may benefit patients with chronic respiratory failure and sleep-disordered breathing related to NMD. When resources allow, polysomnography or overnight oximetry can help to guide the initiation of NIV. The panel provided guidelines for mouthpiece ventilation, transition to home mechanical ventilation, salivary secretion management, and airway clearance therapies. The guideline panel emphasizes that NMD pathologic characteristics represent a diverse group of disorders with differing rates of decline in lung function. The clinician\'s role is to add evaluation at the bedside to shared decision-making with patients and families, including respect for patient preferences and treatment goals, considerations of quality of life, and appropriate use of available resources in decision-making.

This rapid practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for the use of awake proning in adult patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19. The panel included 20 experts from 12 countries, including one patient representative, and used a strict conflict of interest policy for potential financial and intellectual conflicts of interest. Methodological support was provided by the guidelines in intensive care, development, and evaluation (GUIDE) group. Based on an updated systematic review, and the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) method we evaluated the certainty of evidence and developed recommendations using the Evidence-to-Decision framework. We conducted an electronic vote, requiring >80% agreement amongst the panel for a recommendation to be adopted. The panel made a strong recommendation for a trial of awake proning in adult patients with COVID-19 related hypoxemic acute respiratory failure who are not invasively ventilated. Awake proning appears to reduce the risk of tracheal intubation, although it may not reduce mortality. The panel judged that most patients would want a trial of awake proning, although this may not be feasible in some patients and some patients may not tolerate it. However, given the high risk of clinical deterioration amongst these patients, awake proning should be conducted in an area where patients can be monitored by staff experienced in rapidly detecting and managing clinical deterioration. This RPG panel recommends a trial of awake prone positioning in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19.

ECMO is an extracorporeal cardiorespiratory support system whose use has been increased in the last decade. Respiratory failure, postcardiotomy shock, and lung or heart primary graft failure may require the use of cardiorespiratory mechanical assistance. In this scenario perioperative medical and surgical management is crucial. Despite the evolution of technology in the area of extracorporeal support, morbidity and mortality of these patients continues to be high, and therefore the indication as well as the ECMO removal should be established within a multidisciplinary team with expertise in the area. This consensus document aims to unify medical knowledge and provides recommendations based on both the recent bibliography and the main national ECMO implantation centres experience with the goal of improving comprehensive patient care.

BACKGROUND: Adjunctive therapy with polyclonal intravenous immunoglobins (IVIg) is currently used for preventing or managing infections and sepsis, especially in immunocompromised patients. The pathobiology of COVID-19 and the mechanisms of action of Ig led to the consideration of this adjunctive therapy, including in patients with respiratory failure due to the SARS-CoV-2 infection. This manuscript reports the rationale, the available data and the results of a structured consensus on intravenous Ig therapy in patients with severe COVID-19.
METHODS: A panel of multidisciplinary experts defined the clinical phenotypes of COVID-19 patients with severe respiratory failure and, after literature review, voted for the agreement on the rationale and the potential role of IVIg therapy for each phenotype. Due to the scarce evidence available, a modified RAND/UCLA appropriateness method was used.
RESULTS: Three different phenotypes of COVID-19 patients with severe respiratory failure were identified: patients with an abrupt and dysregulated hyperinflammatory response (early phase), patients with suspected immune paralysis (late phase) and patients with sepsis due to a hospital-acquired superinfection (sepsis by bacterial superinfection). The rationale for intravenous Ig therapy in the early phase was considered uncertain whereas the panelists considered its use in the late phase and patients with sepsis/septic shock by bacterial superinfection appropriate.
CONCLUSIONS: As with other immunotherapies, IVIg adjunctive therapy may have a potential role in the management of COVID-19 patients. The ongoing trials will clarify the appropriate target population and the true effectiveness.

Respiratory complications are common in the patient with muscular dystrophy. The periodic clinical and instrumental respiratory evaluation is extremely important. Despite the presence in the literature of updated guidelines, patient associations often report lack of knowledge of these pathologies, particularly in peripheral hospitals. The purpose of this work, inspired by the Italian Muscular Dystrophy Association (UILDM) is to improve management of respiratory problems necessary for the management of these patients complex. To this end, the main items that the specialist can meet in the follow-up of these pathologies have been analyzed and discussed, among which the respiratory basal evaluation, the criteria of adaptation to non-invasive ventilation, management of bronchial secretions, situations of respiratory emergency, indications for tracheostomy and the subject of advance directives of treatment (DAT).

These European Resuscitation Council Paediatric Life Support (PLS) guidelines, are based on the 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Science with Treatment Recommendations. This section provides guidelines on the management of critically ill infants and children, before, during and after cardiac arrest.

High flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is a relatively recent respiratory support technique which delivers high flow, heated and humidified controlled concentration of oxygen via the nasal route. Recently, its use has increased for a variety of clinical indications. To guide clinical practice, we developed evidence-based recommendations regarding use of HFNC in various clinical settings.
We formed a guideline panel composed of clinicians, methodologists and experts in respiratory medicine. Using GRADE, the panel developed recommendations for four actionable questions.
The guideline panel made a strong recommendation for HFNC in hypoxemic respiratory failure compared to conventional oxygen therapy (COT) (moderate certainty), a conditional recommendation for HFNC following extubation (moderate certainty), no recommendation regarding HFNC in the peri-intubation period (moderate certainty), and a conditional recommendation for postoperative HFNC in high risk and/or obese patients following cardiac or thoracic surgery (moderate certainty).
This clinical practice guideline synthesizes current best-evidence into four recommendations for HFNC use in patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure, following extubation, in the peri-intubation period, and postoperatively for bedside clinicians.

To provide clinical practice recommendations and generate a research agenda on mechanical ventilation and respiratory support in patients with acute brain injury (ABI).
An international consensus panel was convened including 29 clinician-scientists in intensive care medicine with expertise in acute respiratory failure, neurointensive care, or both, and two non-voting methodologists. The panel was divided into seven subgroups, each addressing a predefined clinical practice domain relevant to patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with ABI, defined as acute traumatic brain or cerebrovascular injury. The panel conducted systematic searches and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) method was used to evaluate evidence and formulate questions. A modified Delphi process was implemented with four rounds of voting in which panellists were asked to respond to questions (rounds 1-3) and then recommendation statements (final round). Strong recommendation, weak recommendation, or no recommendation were defined when > 85%, 75-85%, and < 75% of panellists, respectively, agreed with a statement.
The GRADE rating was low, very low, or absent across domains. The consensus produced 36 statements (19 strong recommendations, 6 weak recommendations, 11 no recommendation) regarding airway management, non-invasive respiratory support, strategies for mechanical ventilation, rescue interventions for respiratory failure, ventilator liberation, and tracheostomy in brain-injured patients. Several knowledge gaps were identified to inform future research efforts.
This consensus provides guidance for the care of patients admitted to the ICU with ABI. Evidence was generally insufficient or lacking, and research is needed to demonstrate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of different management approaches.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare the 28-day mortality of patients with septic shock, defined by Sepsis-3 criteria and patients with vasoplegic or cryptic shock who are excluded from this new definition.
OBJECTIVE: This retrospective observational study was performed using a tertiary emergency department\'s septic shock registry and investigated the records of patients managed between January 2010 and December 2015. In 2,138 total patients, 1004 (47.0%) had septic shock, 476 (22.2%) had vasoplegic shock and 655 (30.6%) had cryptic shock.
RESULTS: There was significant variation in 28-day mortality among the three groups: 23.4% for septic shock, 8.8% for vasoplegic shock and 12.2% for cryptic shock (P < .001). In subgroup analysis of cryptic shock or septic shock according to lactate levels (2-3, 3-4 and >4 mmol/L), the mortality rate increased as lactate increased (cryptic shock: 9.5%, 14.8% and 18.0%; septic shock: 18.6%, 22.6% and 27.0%, respectively; P < .001). Multivariable analysis revealed odds ratios for mortality of 0.31 (95% CI 0.22-0.44; P < .001) for vasoplegic shock and 0.46 (95% CI 0.35-0.61; P < .001) for cryptic shock relative to septic shock. Survival curve analysis showed significant differences among patients with septic shock, vasoplegic shock and cryptic shock (Log rank test: P < .0001).
CONCLUSIONS: The new septic shock definition may be useful for identifying high-risk patients requiring intensive care. However, cryptic shock-associated mortality increased to 18.0% as serum lactate increased, which suggests that some cryptic shock patients may also require intensive management.

Advanced cystic fibrosis lung disease (ACFLD) is common, is associated with reduced quality of life, and remains the most frequent cause of death in individuals with cystic fibrosis (CF). These consensus guidelines provide recommendations to the CF community on management of both common and unique issues that arise when individuals reach a state of ACFLD.
The CF Foundation assembled a multidisciplinary expert panel consisting of three workgroups: Pulmonary management; Management of comorbid conditions; Symptom management and psychosocial issues. Topics were excluded if the management considerations did not differ in ACFLD from in the overall CF population or if already addressed in other published guidelines. Recommendations were based on a systematic literature review combined with expert opinion when appropriate.
The committee formulated twenty-three recommendation statements specific to ACFLD that address the definition of ACFLD, pulmonary and intensive care unit management, management of selected comorbidities, symptom control, and psychosocial issues.
These recommendations are intended to be paired with previously published management guidelines for the overall CF population, with the objective of reducing practice variability and improving overall care, quality of life, and survival in those with ACFLD.