Aeration Phenotype of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Multicenter Prognostic Study Based on Automatic Quantitative Analysis of Chest CT

Shan Huang,Qian Yu,Yue Qiu,Yuan-Cheng Wang,Jianfeng Xie,Shu Wang,Jun Zhu,Jiaying Zhou,Xiangpan Meng,Yi Yang,Shenghong Ju
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4068247
2022-01-01
Abstract:Background: Automatic lung segmentation based on CT is challenging in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and thus quantitative CT analysis is not generally applied in clinical practice.Materials and Methods: This multicenter retrospective cohort study included ARDS patients who received chest CT examination within 24 hours after ICU admission from January 2014 to January 2021. A well-trained deep learning model based on U-net was applied to segment bilateral lungs and extract varied inflated lung tissues (including hyper-inflated, normally aerated, poorly-aerated, non-aerated lung tissues). The primary outcome was the mortality on day-28.Findings: Three hundred and fifty patients (median age, 66.5 years (53-77) [interquartile range]; 243 men) were included in this study. The mortality rate was 27.4%. Among four varied inflated regions, it was found that the normally aerated lung region was associated with the mortality on day-28. According to the Youden method, the threshold was defined as 70%. The well-inflated status was a protector of the day-28 mortality (Odds ratio, 0.340; 95% CI: 0.162, 0.713; P = 0.004 in Center 1 and Odds ratio, 0.234; 95% CI: 0.092, 0.600; P = 0.002 in Center 2). A significant difference existed in tidal volume ( P = 0.027), positive end expiratory pressure ( P < 0.001), peak inspiratory pressure ( P = 0.001) and compliance ( P = 0.004) between the two groups.Interpretation: Well-inflated status is a protector of patient’s prognosis, and may have a correlation with respiratory mechanism.Funding: This research was supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (2021YFF0501504) and National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC, No. 61821002).Declaration of Interest: None to declare. Ethical Approval: This is a multicenter retrospective cohort study and the informed consent was waived. It was approved by the ethic boards of the main center.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?