The role of inhaled prostacyclin in treating acute respiratory distress syndrome

RJ Searcy, JR Morales, JA Ferreira… - Therapeutic …, 2015 - journals.sagepub.com
RJ Searcy, JR Morales, JA Ferreira, DW Johnson
Therapeutic advances in respiratory disease, 2015journals.sagepub.com
Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a syndrome of acute lung injury that is
characterized by noncardiogenic pulmonary edema and severe hypoxemia second to a
pathogenic impairment of gas exchange. Despite significant advances in the area, mortality
remains high among ARDS patients. High mortality and a limited spectrum of therapeutic
options have left clinicians searching for alternatives, spiking interest in selective pulmonary
vasodilators (SPVs). Despite the lack of robust evidence, SPVs are commonly employed for …
Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a syndrome of acute lung injury that is characterized by noncardiogenic pulmonary edema and severe hypoxemia second to a pathogenic impairment of gas exchange. Despite significant advances in the area, mortality remains high among ARDS patients. High mortality and a limited spectrum of therapeutic options have left clinicians searching for alternatives, spiking interest in selective pulmonary vasodilators (SPVs). Despite the lack of robust evidence, SPVs are commonly employed for their therapeutic role in improving oxygenation in patients who have developed refractory hypoxemia in ARDS. While inhaled epoprostenol (iEPO) also impacts arterial oxygenation by decreasing ventilation–perfusion (V/Q) mismatching and pulmonary shunt flow, this effect is not different from inhaled nitric oxide (iNO). The most effective and safest dose for yielding a clinically significant increase in PaO2 and reduction in pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) appears to be 20–30 ng/kg/min in adults and 30 ng/kg/min in pediatric patients. iEPO appears to have a ceiling effect above these doses in which no additional benefit may be derived. iNO and iEPO have shown similar efficacy profiles; however, they differ with respect to cost and ease of therapeutic administration. The most beneficial effects of iEPO have been seen in adult patients with secondary ARDS as compared with primary ARDS, most likely due to the difference in etiology of the two disease states, and in patients suffering from baseline right ventricular heart failure. Although iEPO has demonstrated improvements in hemodynamic parameters and oxygenation in ARDS patients, due to the limited number of randomized clinical trials and the lack of studies investigating mortality, the use of iEPO cannot be recommended as standard of care in ARDS. iEPO should be reserved for those refractory to traditional therapies.
Sage Journals