Background: This document updates previously published Clinical Practice Guidelines for the management of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), incorporating new evidence addressing the use of corticosteroids, venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, neuromuscular blocking agents, and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP). Methods: We summarized evidence addressing four “PICO questions” (patient, intervention, comparison, and outcome). A multidisciplinary panel with expertise in ARDS used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework to develop clinical recommendations. Results: We suggest the use of: 1) corticosteroids for patients with ARDS (conditional recommendation, moderate certainty of evidence), 2) venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in selected patients with severe ARDS (conditional recommendation, low certainty of evidence), 3) neuromuscular blockers in patients with early severe ARDS (conditional recommendation, low certainty of evidence), and 4) higher PEEP without lung recruitment maneuvers as opposed to lower PEEP in patients with moderate to severe ARDS (conditional recommendation, low to moderate certainty), and 5) we recommend against using prolonged lung recruitment maneuvers in patients with moderate to severe ARDS (strong recommendation, moderate certainty). Conclusions: We provide updated evidence-based recommendations for the management of ARDS. Individual patient and illness characteristics should be factored into clinical decision making and implementation of these recommendations while additional evidence is generated from much-needed clinical trials.

Objective: To summarize knowledge and identify gaps in evidence regarding treatment of right ventricular dysfunction (RVD) in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Data sources: We conducted a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Study selection: Studies were included if they reported effects of treatments on right ventricular function, whether or not the intent was to modify right ventricular function. Data extraction: Data extraction was performed independently and in duplicate by two authors. Data items included the study design, patient population, type of intervention, comparison group, and RV-specific outcomes. Data synthesis: Of 1,430 studies screened, 51 studies reporting on 1,526 patients were included. By frequency, the included studies examined the following interventions: ventilator settings (29.4%), inhaled medications (33.3%), extracorporeal life support (13.7%), intravenous or oral medications (13.7%), and prone positioning (9.8%). The majority of the studies were non-randomized experimental studies (53%), with the next most common being case reports (16%). Only 5.9% of studies were RCTs. In total, 27% of studies were conducted with the goal of modifying RV function. Conclusions: Given the prevalence of RVD in ARDS and its association with mortality, the dearth of research on this topic is concerning. This review highlights the need for prospective trials aimed at treating RV dysfunction in ARDS.

Right ventricle‐pulmonary artery (RV‐PA) coupling describes the energetic relationship between RV contractility and its afterload. The gold standard for assessment of this relationship requires invasive pressure‐volume (PV) loop measurements. Non‐invasive surrogates of RV‐PA coupling have been developed, such as the echocardiographic tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion to pulmonary artery systolic pressure ratio (TAPSE/PASP), but their performance has not been systematically assessed. We sought to assess performance of TAPSE/PASP ratio compared to PV loop‐defined RV‐PA coupling. A systematic search was conducted. Studies were included if PV loop derived RV‐PA coupling metrics were compared to echocardiographic or magnetic resonance imaging surrogates. We conducted a meta‐analysis of TAPSE/PASP correlation to PV loop‐defined RV‐PA coupling. 1452 studies were identified in the initial search, of which ten met inclusion criteria. Five studies allowed for pooled analysis of TAPSE/PASP to Ees/Ea correlation (r = 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.36–0.65). There was moderate heterogeneity across the pooled studies. Despite the common use of Non‐invasive surrogates of RV‐PA coupling, there is only moderate correlation with gold standard measurements. These metrics do not inform on the individual components of RV‐PA coupling, limiting their use in the management of patients with RV dysfunction.

The resuscitation of a patient in shock is a highly complex endeavor that should go beyond normalizing mean arterial pressure and protocolized fluid loading. We propose a holistic, four-interface conceptual model of shock that we believe can benefit both clinicians at the bedside and researchers. The four circulatory interfaces whose uncoupling results in shock are as follows: the left ventricle to arterial, the arterial to capillary, the capillary to venular, and finally the right ventricle to pulmonary artery. We review the pathophysiology and clinical consequences behind the uncoupling of these interfaces, as well as how to assess them, and propose a strategy for approaching a patient in shock. Bedside assessment of shock may include these critical interfaces in order to avoid hemodynamic incoherence and to focus on microcirculatory restoration rather than simply mean arterial pressure. The purpose of this model is to serve as a mental model for learners as well as a framework for further resuscitation research that incorporates these concepts.