Cardiovascular Disease and Severe Hypoxemia Are Associated With Higher Rates of Noninvasive Respiratory Support Failure in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pneumonia

Noninvasive respiratory support in the emergency department: Controversies and state-of-the-art recommendations

Acute respiratory failure is a common reason for emergency department visits and hospital admissions. Diverse underlying physiologic abnormalities lead to unique aspects about the most common causes of acute respiratory failure: acute decompensated heart failure, acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and acute de novo hypoxemic respiratory failure. Noninvasive respiratory support strategies are increasingly used methods to support work of breathing and improve gas exchange abnormalities to improve outcomes relative to conventional oxygen therapy or invasive mechanical ventilation. Noninvasive respiratory support includes noninvasive positive pressure ventilation and nasal high flow, each with unique physiologic mechanisms. This paper will review the physiology of respiratory failure and noninvasive respiratory support modalities and offer data and guideline-driven recommendations in the context of key clinical controversies.

Acute Respiratory Failure From Early Pandemic COVID-19: Noninvasive Respiratory Support vs Mechanical Ventilation

BACKGROUND

The optimal strategy for initial respiratory support in patients with respiratory failure associated with COVID-19 is unclear, and the initial strategy may affect outcomes.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Which initial respiratory support strategy is associated with improved outcomes in patients with COVID-19 with acute respiratory failure?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

All patients with COVID-19 requiring respiratory support and admitted to a large health care network were eligible for inclusion. We compared patients treated initially with noninvasive respiratory support (NIRS; noninvasive positive pressure ventilation by facemask or high-flow nasal oxygen) with patients treated initially with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). The primary outcome was time to in-hospital death analyzed using an inverse probability of treatment weighted Cox model adjusted for potential confounders. Secondary outcomes included unweighted and weighted assessments of mortality, lengths of stay (ICU and hospital), and time to intubation.

RESULTS

Nearly one-half of the 2,354 patients (47%) who met inclusion criteria received IMV first, and 53% received initial NIRS. Overall, in-hospital mortality was 38% (37% for IMV and 39% for NIRS). Initial NIRS was associated with an increased hazard of death compared with initial IMV (hazard ratio, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.03-1.94), but also an increased hazard of leaving the hospital sooner that waned with time (noninvasive support by time interaction: hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95-0.98).

INTERPRETATION

Patients with COVID-19 with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure initially treated with NIRS showed an increased hazard of in-hospital death.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Associated with a Higher Risk of Hypoxemia and COVID-19 Severity

OBJECTIVE

The primary goal of the present study was to measure the implications of hypoxemia in COVID-19 patients with a history of coronary artery disease (CAD).

METHODS

A systematic search of the literature published from November 1, 2019 to May 1, 2021, was conducted on PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science databases. Afterwards, an observational study was designed based on the electronic health records of COVID-19 patients hospitalized in a tertiary referral hospital during the same period. A total of 179 COVID-19 cases were divided into two groups: cases with a history of CAD and percutaneous coronary intervention (CAD/PCI+, n = 89) and controls (n = 90). Clinical data were extracted from the electronic database of the hospital and statistically analyzed.

RESULTS

After the application of inclusion/exclusion criteria, only three studies were deemed eligible, one of which was concerned with the impact of CAD on the all-cause mortality of COVID-19. Results from our observational study indicated that the cases were older (median age: 74 vs. 45) and more likely to develop hypoxemia (25.8% vs. 8.8%) than the controls. CAD/PCI+ was correlated with a more severe COVID-19 (11% vs. 1%). Age was a moderately significant independent predictor of increased COVID-19 severity, while hypoxemia was not.

CONCLUSION

Considering the negative impact of hypoxemia on the prognosis of COVID-19 and its higher prevalence among COVID-19 patients with underlying CAD, further research is warranted to unravel the negative effects of COVID-19 on the mechanisms of gas exchange and delivery in patients with pre-existing CAD.

Effect of the Early Combination of Continuous Positive Airway Pressure and High-Flow Nasal Cannula on Mortality and Intubation Rates in Patients With COVID-19 and Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome. The DUOCOVID Study

INTRODUCTION

Non invasive respiratory support (NIRS) is useful for treating acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) secondary to COVID-19, mainly in mild-moderate stages. Although continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) seems superior to other NIRS, prolonged periods of use and poor adaptation may contribute to its failure. The combination of CPAP sessions and high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) breaks could improve comfort and keep respiratory mechanics stable without reducing the benefits of positive airway pressure (PAP). Our study aimed to determine if HFNC+CPAP initiates early lower mortality and endotracheal intubation (ETI) rates.

METHODS

Subjects were admitted to the intermediate respiratory care unit (IRCU) of a COVID-19 monographic hospital between January and September 2021. They were divided according to Early HFNC+CPAP (first 24h, EHC group) and Delayed HFNC+CPAP (after 24h, DHC group). Laboratory data, NIRS parameters, and the ETI and 30-day mortality rates were collected. A multivariate analysis was performed to identify the risk factors associated with these variables.

RESULTS

The median age of the 760 included patients was 57 (IQR 47-66), who were mostly male (66.1%). The median Charlson Comorbidity Index was 2 (IQR 1-3) and 46.8% were obese. The median PaO₂/FiO₂ upon IRCU admission was 95 (IQR 76-126). The ETI rate in the EHC group was 34.5%, with 41.8% for the DHC group (p=0.045), while 30-day mortality was 8.2% and 15.5%, respectively (p=0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Particularly in the first 24h after IRCU admission, the HFNC+CPAP combination was associated with a reduction in the 30-day mortality and ETI rates in patients with ARDS secondary to COVID-19.

Outcomes in Patients with Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure Secondary to COVID-19 Treated with Noninvasive Respiratory Support versus Invasive Mechanical Ventilation

Purpose

The goal of this study was to compare noninvasive respiratory support to invasive mechanical ventilation as the initial respiratory support in COVID-19 patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.

Methods

All patients admitted to a large healthcare network with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure associated with COVID-19 and requiring respiratory support were eligible for inclusion. We compared patients treated initially with noninvasive respiratory support (noninvasive positive pressure ventilation by facemask or high flow nasal oxygen) with patients treated initially with invasive mechanical ventilation. The primary outcome was time-to-in-hospital death analyzed using an inverse probability of treatment weighted Cox model adjusted for potential confounders. Secondary outcomes included unweighted and weighted assessments of mortality, lengths-of-stay (intensive care unit and hospital) and time-to-intubation.

Results

Over the study period, 2354 patients met inclusion criteria. Nearly half (47%) received invasive mechanical ventilation first and 53% received initial noninvasive respiratory support. There was an overall 38% in-hospital mortality (37% for invasive mechanical ventilation and 39% for noninvasive respiratory support). Initial noninvasive respiratory support was associated with an increased hazard of death compared to initial invasive mechanical ventilation (HR: 1.61, p < 0.0001, 95% CI: 1.33 - 1.94). However, patients on initial noninvasive respiratory support also experienced an increased hazard of leaving the hospital sooner, but the hazard ratio waned with time (HR: 0.97, p < 0.0001, 95% CI: 0.96 - 0.98).

Conclusion

These data show that the COVID-19 patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure initially treated with noninvasive respiratory support had an increased hazard of in-hospital death.

Noninvasive Respiratory Assist Devices in the Management of COVID-19-related Hypoxic Respiratory Failure: Pune ISCCM COVID-19 ARDS Study Consortium (PICASo)

Objective

To determine whether high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) or noninvasive ventilator (NIV) can avoid invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ADRS), and the outcome predictors of these modalities.

Design

Multicenter retrospective study conducted in 12 ICUs in Pune, India.

Patients

Patients with COVID-19 pneumonia who had PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio <150 and were treated with HFNO and/or NIV.

Intervention

HFNO and/or NIV.

Measurements

The primary outcome was to assess the need of IMV. Secondary outcomes were death at Day 28 and mortality rates in different treatment groups.

Main results

Among 1,201 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 35.9% (431/1,201) were treated successfully with HFNO and/or NIV and did not require IMV. About 59.5% (714/1,201) patients needed IMV for the failure of HFNO and/or NIV. About 48.3, 61.6, and 63.6% of patients who were treated with HFNO, NIV, or both, respectively, needed IMV. The need of IMV was significantly lower in the HFNO group (p <0.001). The 28-day mortality was 44.9, 59.9, and 59.6% in the patients treated with HFNO, NIV, or both, respectively (p <0.001). On multivariate regression analysis, presence of any comorbidity, SpO₂ <90%, and presence of nonrespiratory organ dysfunction were independent and significant determinants of mortality (p <0.05).

Conclusions

During COVID-19 pandemic surge, HFNO and/or NIV could successfully avoid IMV in 35.5% individuals with PO₂/FiO₂ ratio <150. Those who needed IMV due to failure of HFNO or NIV had high (87.5%) mortality.

How to cite this article

Jog S, Zirpe K, Dixit S, Godavarthy P, Shahane M, Kadapatti K, et al. Noninvasive Respiratory Assist Devices in the Management of COVID-19-related Hypoxic Respiratory Failure: Pune ISCCM COVID-19 ARDS Study Consortium (PICASo). Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(7):791-797.

Coupling of right ventricular function to pulmonary circulation as an independent predictor for non invasive ventilation failure in SARSCoV 2-related acute respiratory distress syndrome

Study objectives

To assess whether echocardiography, systematically performed, could help in risk stratifying patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to SARS-CoV2 (COVID) infection for non invasive ventilation (NIV) failure.

Design

Observational single center investigation.

Setting

Intensive care unit.

Interventions

Echocardiography.

Outcome measures

NIV failure.

Main results

Seventy-five patients were included in our study. In respect to patients who did not need mechanical ventilation (NIV success), those in the NIV failure subgroup (31 patients, 41 %) were older, with more comorbidities and showed a higher SOFA score and LOS. Higher values of NTpro BNP, CRP and D-dimer were observed in the NIV failure subgroup who exhibited a higher ICU mortality rate. At echocardiographic examination, the NIV failure subgroup showed higher values of RV/LV ratio, systolic pulmonary arterial pressure (sPAP) and lower values of tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE)/SPAP, and PaO2/FiO2. At logistic regression analysis TAPSE/sPAP resulted an independent predictor of NIV failure. At receiving operating characteristic curve analysis, the TAPSE/SPAP cut-off of 0.575 mm/mm Hg showed a sensitivity of 97 % and a specificity of 48 %.

Conclusions

Our results documented a marked uncoupling of right ventricular function from the pulmonary circulation (as indicated by TAPSE/sPAP) in COVID-related ARDS treated with non invasive ventilation and the measurement of this parameter, performed on ICU admission, provides independent prognostic relevance for NIV failure.

Non-invasive respiratory support in the management of acute COVID-19 pneumonia: considerations for clinical practice and priorities for research

Non-invasive respiratory support (NIRS) has increasingly been used in the management of COVID-19-associated acute respiratory failure, but questions remain about the utility, safety, and outcome benefit of NIRS strategies. We identified two randomised controlled trials and 83 observational studies, compromising 13 931 patients, that examined the effects of NIRS modalities-high-flow nasal oxygen, continuous positive airway pressure, and bilevel positive airway pressure-on patients with COVID-19. Of 5120 patients who were candidates for full treatment escalation, 1880 (37%) progressed to invasive mechanical ventilation and 3658 of 4669 (78%) survived to study end. Survival was 30% among the 1050 patients for whom NIRS was the stated ceiling of treatment. The two randomised controlled trials indicate superiority of non-invasive ventilation over high-flow nasal oxygen in reducing the need for intubation. Reported complication rates were low. Overall, the studies indicate that NIRS in patients with COVID-19 is safe, improves resource utilisation, and might be associated with better outcomes. To guide clinical decision making, prospective, randomised studies are needed to address timing of intervention, optimal use of NIRS modalities-alone or in combination-and validation of tools such as oxygenation indices, response to a trial of NIRS, and inflammatory markers as predictors of treatment success.

Use of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen and risk factors for high-flow nasal cannula oxygen failure in critically-ill patients with COVID-19

BACKGROUND

High-flow nasal oxygen therapy (HFNC) may be an attractive first-line ventilatory support in COVID-19 patients. However, HNFC use for the management of COVID-19 patients and risk factors for HFNC failure remain to be determined.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we included all consecutive COVID-19 patients admitted to our intensive care unit (ICU) in the first (Mars-May 2020) and second (August 2020- February 202) French pandemic waves. Patients with limitations for intubation were excluded. HFNC failure was defined as the need for intubation after ICU admission. The impact of HFNC use was analyzed in the whole cohort and after constructing a propensity score. Risk factors for HNFC failure were identified through a landmark time-dependent cause-specific Cox model. The ability of the 6-h ROX index to detect HFNC failure was assessed by generating receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

RESULTS

200 patients were included: HFNC was used in 114(57%) patients, non-invasive ventilation in 25(12%) patients and 145(72%) patients were intubated with a median delay of 0 (0-2) days after ICU admission. Overall, 78(68%) patients had HFNC failure. Patients with HFNC failure had a higher ICU mortality rate (34 vs. 11%, p = 0.02) than those without. At landmark time of 48 and 72 h, SAPS-2 score, extent of CT-Scan abnormalities > 75% and HFNC duration (cause specific hazard ratio (CSH) = 0.11, 95% CI (0.04-0.28), per + 1 day, p < 0.001 at 48 h and CSH = 0.06, 95% CI (0.02-0.23), per + 1 day, p < 0.001 at 72 h) were associated with HFNC failure. The 6-h ROX index was lower in patients with HFNC failure but could not reliably predicted HFNC failure with an area under ROC curve of 0.65 (95% CI(0.52-0.78), p = 0.02). In the matched cohort, HFNC use was associated with a lower risk of intubation (CSH = 0.32, 95% CI (0.19-0.57), p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In critically-ill COVID-19 patients, while HFNC use as first-line ventilatory support was associated with a lower risk of intubation, more than half of patients had HFNC failure. Risk factors for HFNC failure were SAPS-2 score and extent of CT-Scan abnormalities > 75%. The risk of HFNC failure could not be predicted by the 6-h ROX index but decreased after a 48-h HFNC duration.