High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy versus non-invasive ventilation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients after extubation: a multicenter, randomized controlled trial

Association between high-flow nasal cannula use and mortality in patients with sepsis-induced acute lung injury: a retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has emerged as a promising noninvasive method for delivering oxygen to critically ill patients, particularly those with sepsis and acute lung injury. However, uncertainties persist regarding its therapeutic benefits in this specific patient population.

METHODS

This retrospective study utilized a propensity score-matched cohort from the Medical Information Mart in Intensive Care-IV (MIMIC-IV) database to explore the correlation between HFNC utilization and mortality in patients with sepsis-induced acute lung injury. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

In the propensity score-matched cohort, the 28-day all-cause mortality rate was 18.63% (95 out of 510) in the HFNC use group, compared to 31.18% (159 out of 510) in the non-HFNC group. The use of HFNC was associated with a lower 28-day all-cause mortality rate (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.41-0.69; P < 0.001). HFNC use was also associated with lower ICU mortality (odds ratio [OR] = 0.52; 95% CI = 0.38-0.71; P < 0.001) and lower in-hospital mortality (OR = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.38-0.68; P < 0.001). Additionally, HFNC use was found to be associated with a statistically significant increase in both the ICU and overall hospitalization length.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings indicate that HFNC may be beneficial for reducing mortality rates among sepsis-induced acute lung injury patients; however, it is also associated with longer hospital stays.

Noninvasive Ventilation in the Cardiac Intensive Care Unit

Over the last several decades, the cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) has seen an increase in the complexity of the patient population and etiologies requiring CICU admission. Currently, respiratory failure is the most common reason for admission to the contemporary CICU. As a result, noninvasive ventilation (NIV), including noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation and high-flow nasal cannula, has been increasingly utilized in the management of patients admitted to the CICU. In this review, we detail the different NIV modalities and summarize the evidence supporting their use in conditions frequently encountered in the CICU. We describe the unique pathophysiologic interactions between positive pressure ventilation and left and/or right ventricular dysfunction. Additionally, we discuss the evidence and strategies for utilization of NIV as a method to reduce extubation failure in patients who required invasive mechanical ventilation. Lastly, we examine unique considerations for managing respiratory failure in certain, high-risk patient populations such as those with right ventricular failure, severe valvular disease, and adult congenital heart disease. Overall, it is critical for clinicians who practice in the CICU to be experts with the application, risks, benefits, and modalities of NIV in cardiac patients with respiratory failure.

Ventilator Weaning in Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation-A Narrative Review

Patients requiring mechanical ventilation (MV) beyond 21 days, usually referred to as prolonged MV, represent a unique group with significant medical needs and a generally poor prognosis. Research suggests that approximately 10% of all MV patients will need prolonged ventilatory care, and that number will continue to rise. Although we have extensive knowledge of MV in the acute care setting, less is known about care in the post-ICU setting. More than 50% of patients who were deemed unweanable in the ICU will be liberated from MV in the post-acute setting. Prolonged MV also presents a challenge in care for medically complex, elderly, socioeconomically disadvantaged and marginalized individuals, usually at the end of their life. Patients and their families often rely on ventilator weaning facilities and skilled nursing homes for the continuation of care, but home ventilation is becoming more common. The focus of this review is to discuss recent advances in the weaning strategies in prolonged MV, present their outcomes and provide insight into the complexity of care.

Liberation from mechanical ventilation in critically ill patients: Korean Society of Critical Care Medicine Clinical Practice Guidelines

BACKGROUND

Successful liberation from mechanical ventilation is one of the most crucial processes in critical care because it is the first step by which a respiratory failure patient begins to transition out of the intensive care unit and return to their own life. Therefore, when devising appropriate strategies for removing mechanical ventilation, it is essential to consider not only the individual experiences of healthcare professionals, but also scientific and systematic approaches. Recently, numerous studies have investigated methods and tools for identifying when mechanically ventilated patients are ready to breathe on their own. The Korean Society of Critical Care Medicine therefore provides these recommendations to clinicians about liberation from the ventilator.

METHODS

Meta-analyses and comprehensive syntheses were used to thoroughly review, compile, and summarize the complete body of relevant evidence. All studies were meticulously assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method, and the outcomes were presented succinctly as evidence profiles. Those evidence syntheses were discussed by a multidisciplinary committee of experts in mechanical ventilation, who then developed and approved recommendations.

RESULTS

Recommendations for nine PICO (population, intervention, comparator, and outcome) questions about ventilator liberation are presented in this document. This guideline includes seven conditional recommendations, one expert consensus recommendation, and one conditional deferred recommendation.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed these clinical guidelines for mechanical ventilation liberation to provide meaningful recommendations. These guidelines reflect the best treatment for patients seeking liberation from mechanical ventilation.

Impact of different oxygen therapy strategies on the risk of endotracheal reintubation in mechanically ventilated patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Mechanical ventilation (MV) is a crucial intervention for the support of patients with acute and severe respiratory failure in modern intensive care medicine. However, the mechanical forces resulting from the interplay between the ventilator and the respiratory system may cause pulmonary injury.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy and other oxygen therapy modalities on the risk of endotracheal reintubation in mechanically ventilated patients after extubation in the intensive care unit (ICU).

METHODS

An electronic search was carried out across various databases including PubMed, Embase, Ovid, Medline, Cochrane Library, Embase, VIP, and Wanfang. The objective of this search was to locate prospective randomized controlled trials that examined the effects of multiple oxygen therapy approaches on the incidence of reintubation in patients in the ICU after undergoing mechanical ventilation. The meta package in R language was used to analyze parameters adopted by the included studies such as reintubation rate, mortality rate, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

This study enrolled 22 articles, involving 4,160 participants, with 2,061 in the study group and 2,099 in the control group. Among these, 20 articles presented data on the reintubation rate of the patients included with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.74, 1.09) for HFNC and an OR of 1.77 (95% CI: 0.93, 3.38) for HFNC in the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) subgroup. Moreover, 10 articles assessed the incidence of respiratory failure after extubation, revealing an OR for HFNC was 0.68 (95% CI: 0.55, 0.84) using a fixed-effects model. Nine articles addressed ICU mortality, while 13 pieces of literature examined hospital mortality. HFNC showed no significant impact on either ICU mortality or hospital mortality.

CONCLUSION

HFNC therapy markedly reduces the incidence of respiratory failure in mechanically ventilated patients following extubation in the ICU. Furthermore, it specifically reduces the risk of reintubation in patients diagnosed with COPD.

Effect of budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler combined with nasal high-flow nasal cannula on elderly patients with COPD and respiratory failure

Objective

To explore the clinical effect of budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler (BGF MDI) combined with high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) in the treatment of elderly patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and respiratory failure.

Methods

The clinical records of 94 elderly patients with COPD and respiratory failure who were treated in Yongkang First People's Hospital from February 2022 to January 2023 were retrospectively selected. Among them, 46 patients received HFNC alone (Control-group) and 48 patients received HFNC combined with BGF MDI (Study-group). The treatment effect, arterial blood gas status, pulmonary function, and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) II score before and after treatment were analyzed in both groups.

Results

The total efficacy of treatment in the Study-group (95.8%) was higher than that in the Control-group (78.3%) (P<0.05). After treatment, the partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide (PaCO2), residual volume, and APACHE II scores in the two groups decreased compared to those before treatment, with the Study-group lower overall. However, arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2), oxygen partial pressure (PaO2), the percentage of peak expiratory flow (PEF), and forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) as percent of predicted (%FEV1) were higher than before treatment, and higher in the Study-group (P<0.05).

Conclusions

Compared with HFNC alone, BGF MDI combined with HFNC can effectively regulate the arterial blood gas status of elderly patients with COPD and respiratory failure, restore pulmonary function, and improve the overall treatment effect.

Personalized Noninvasive Respiratory Support in the Perioperative Setting: State of the Art and Future Perspectives

Background: Noninvasive respiratory support (NRS), including high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (HFNOT), noninvasive ventilation (NIV) and continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), are routinely used in the perioperative period. Objectives: This narrative review provides an overview on the perioperative use of NRS. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative respiratory support is discussed, along with potential future areas of research. Results: During induction of anesthesia, in selected patients at high risk of difficult intubation, NIV is associated with improved gas exchange and reduced risk of postoperative respiratory complications. HFNOT demonstrated an improvement in oxygenation. Evidence on the intraoperative use of NRS is limited. Compared with conventional oxygenation, HFNOT is associated with a reduced risk of hypoxemia during procedural sedation, and recent data indicate a possible role for HFNOT for intraoperative apneic oxygenation in specific surgical contexts. After extubation, "preemptive" NIV and HFNOT in unselected cohorts do not affect clinical outcome. Postoperative "curative" NIV in high-risk patients and among those exhibiting signs of respiratory failure can reduce reintubation rate, especially after abdominal surgery. Data on postoperative "curative" HFNOT are limited. Conclusions: There is increasing evidence on the perioperative use of NRS. Use of NRS should be tailored based on the patient's specific characteristics and type of surgery, aimed at a personalized cost-effective approach.

Respiratory support effect on pharyngeal area in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: A fluoroscopic comparison of NIV, helmet/CPAP, and high-flow nasal cannula

The global use of noninvasive respiratory support provided by different supportive ventilation delivery methods (SVDMs) has increased, but the impact of these devices on the upper airway structures of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is not known. We aimed to compare the pharyngeal cross-sectional area during spontaneous breathing with four different SVDMs: intranasal masks, oronasal masks, high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC), and helmet in patients with ALS. We compared measures of the pharyngeal area during spontaneous breathing and SVDM use. The greatest increase was observed with intranasal mask use, followed by HFNC, oronasal mask, and helmet respectively. In conclusion, upper airway opening in patients with ALS is enhanced by positive pressure with intranasal masks and HFNC, showing promise for increasing pharyngeal patency. Future studies should explore its applicability and effectiveness in maintaining long-term pharyngeal patency, especially in this population with bulbar weakness.

Factors influencing nasal airway pressure and comfort in high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy: a volunteer study

BACKGROUND

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy is essentially a constant-flow, noninvasive respiratory support system similar to a noninvasive ventilator operating in constant-flow mode. The clinical outcome of HFNC oxygen therapy is strongly associated with the pressure generated by high-flow gas and the patient's comfort level. This study was performed to explore the relevant factors affecting pressure and comfort of HFNC oxygen therapy in vivo.

METHODS

Thirty-five healthy volunteers were enrolled in the trial. They underwent placement of nasal cannulas of various inner diameters (3, 4 or 5 mm) and treatment with different HFNC devices [HFT-300 (Weishengkang Medical Technology Co., Ltd., Jiangsu China) or H-80 M (BMC Medical Co., Ltd., Beijing China)],and the nasal airway pressure and comfort were assessed. Multiple linear regression was used to determine predictors of airway pressure.

RESULTS

Multiple linear regression showed that the end-expiratory pressure was associated with the flow rate, sex, height, and cannula size. The end-expiratory pressure increased by 0.6 cmH2O per 1-mm increase in cannula diameter, decreased by 0.3 cmH2O per 10-cm increase in participant height (with a 0.35 cmH2O decrease for men), and increased by 1 cmH2O when the flow rate increased by 10 L/min (R2 = 0.75, P < 0.05 for all variables in model). In addition, the pressure generated by the H-80 M device was higher than that generated by the HFT-300 device (P < 0.05). Discomfort manifested as difficulty in expiration, and its severity increased as the cannula diameter increased; however there was no significant difference in comfort between the two HFNC devices (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In volunteers undergoing HFNC oxygen therapy, the nasal cannula diameter, flow rate, sex, height, and device model can affect the nasal airway pressure, and the nasal catheter diameter and flow rate can affect comfort. These factors should be given close attention in clinical practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR2300068313 (date of first registration: 14 February 2023,  https://www.chictr.org.cn ).

Clinical study of NFNC in the treatment of acute exacerbation chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with respiratory failure

BACKGROUND

Most patients with acute exacerbation chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) have respiratory failure that necessitates active correction and the improvement of oxygenation is particularly important during treatment. High flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy is a non-invasive respiratory aid that is widely used in the clinic that improves oxygenation state, reduces dead space ventilation and breathing effort, protects the loss of cilia in the airways, and improves patient comfort.

AIM

To compare HFNC and non-invasive positive pressure ventilation in the treatment of patients with AECOPD.

METHODS

Eighty AECOPD patients were included in the study. The patients were in the intensive care department of our hospital from October 2019 to October 2021. The patients were divided into the control and treatment groups according to the different treatment methods with 40 patients in each group. Differences in patient comfort, blood gas analysis and infection indices were analyzed between the two groups.

RESULTS

After treatment, symptoms including nasal, throat and chest discomfort were significantly lower in the treatment group compared to the control group on the 3^rd and 5^th days (P < 0.05). Before treatment, the PaO₂, PaO₂/FiO₂, PaCO₂, and SaO₂ in the two groups of patients were not significantly different (P > 0.05). After treatment, the same indicators were significantly improved in both patient groups but had improved more in the treatment group compared to the control group (P < 0.05). After treatment, the white blood cell count, and the levels of C-reactive protein and calcitonin in patients in the treatment group were significantly higher compared to patients in the control group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

HFNC treatment can improve the ventilation of AECOPD patients whilst also improving patient comfort, and reducing complications. HFNC is a clinically valuable technique for the treatment of AECOPD.

High flow nasal cannula versus noninvasive ventilation in the treatment of acute hypercapnic respiratory failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease can lead to acute hypercapnic respiratory failure (AHRF), often treated using noninvasive ventilation (NIV). Emerging research suggests the potential utility of high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) for AHRF. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the effect of HFNC versus NIV on AHRF management. A search of electronic databases (CINAHL, MEDLINE, and Academic Search Complete), web sources, and trial registries was last conducted on 9 February 2023. Quality and risk of bias assessments were conducted. Meta-analyses were used to synthesise data. Seven randomised controlled trials were included. No statistically significant differences between HFNC and NIV were found within the following outcomes of interest: (i) correction of pCO2: standardised mean difference (SMD) = -0.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) (-0.34 to 0.02), p = 0.08; (ii) correction of pH: SMD = -0.05, 95% CI (-0.25 to 0.14), p = 0.59; (iii) correction of pO2: SMD = -0.15, 95% CI (-0.40 to 0.09), p = 0.22; (iv) intubation rates: risk ratio (RR) = 0.87, 95% CI (0.41 to 1.82), p = 0.71; (v) mortality rates: RR = 0.85, 95% CI (0.47 to 1.56), p = 0.61; and (vi) treatment switch: RR = 1.30, 95% CI (0.43 to 3.94), p = 0.64. More controlled trials with large sample sizes are required to investigate the management of AHRF of various aetiologies. HFNC may be used as a final exhaustive measure for COPD-related AHRF where NIV is not tolerated, and when it is not clinically indicated to extend to endotracheal intubation.

[Non-invasive Mechanical Ventilation in Acute Respiratory Failure. Clinical Practice Guidelines - on behalf of the German Society of Pneumology and Ventilatory Medicine]

The guideline update outlines the advantages as well as the limitations of NIV in the treatment of acute respiratory failure in daily clinical practice and in different indications.Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) has a high value in therapy of hypercapnic acute respiratory failure, as it significantly reduces the length of ICU stay and hospitalization as well as mortality.Patients with cardiopulmonary edema and acute respiratory failure should be treated with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and oxygen in addition to necessary cardiological interventions. This should be done already prehospital and in the emergency department.In case of other forms of acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure with only mild or moderately disturbed gas exchange (PaO2/FiO2 > 150 mmHg) there is no significant advantage or disadvantage compared to high flow nasal oxygen (HFNO). In severe forms of ARDS NIV is associated with high rates of treatment failure and mortality, especially in cases with NIV-failure and delayed intubation.NIV should be used for preoxygenation before intubation. In patients at risk, NIV is recommended to reduce extubation failure. In the weaning process from invasive ventilation NIV essentially reduces the risk of reintubation in hypercapnic patients. NIV is regarded useful within palliative care for reduction of dyspnea and improving quality of life, but here in concurrence to HFNO, which is regarded as more comfortable. Meanwhile NIV is also recommended in prehospital setting, especially in hypercapnic respiratory failure and pulmonary edema.With appropriate monitoring in an intensive care unit NIV can also be successfully applied in pediatric patients with acute respiratory insufficiency.

Comments on "Post-extubation high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy <em>versus</em> non-invasive ventilation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with hypercapnic respiratory failure"

Dear Editor, The recent study published by Ketan et al. provides emerging evidence on the expanding indications for high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) therapy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The indications for hypoxemic respiratory failure being robust, the indications of hypercapnic respiratory failure are emerging....

Pulmonary, circulatory and renal considerations in the early postoperative management of the lung transplant recipient

Lung transplantation volumes and survival rates continue to increase worldwide. Primary graft dysfunction (PGD) and acute kidney injury (AKI) are common early postoperative complications that significantly affect short-term mortality and long-term outcomes. These conditions share overlapping risk factors and are driven, in part, by circulatory derangements. The prevalence of severe PGD is up to 20% and is the leading cause of early death. Patients with pulmonary hypertension are at a higher risk. Prevention and management are based on principles learned from acute lung injury of other causes. Targeting the lowest effective cardiac filling pressure will reduce alveolar edema formation in the setting of increased pulmonary capillary permeability. AKI is reported in up to one-half of lung transplant recipients and is strongly associated with one-year mortality as well as long-term chronic kidney disease. Optimization of renal perfusion is critical to reduce the incidence and severity of AKI. In this review, we highlight key early post-transplant pulmonary, circulatory, and renal perturbations and our center's management approach.

Post-extubation high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy <em>versus</em> non-invasive ventilation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with hypercapnic respiratory failure

The sequential use of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) for weaning in hypercapnic respiratory failure patients is a recommended practice. However, the effectiveness of weaning on High flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is unclear. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with hypercapnic respiratory failure who received invasive ventilation were screened for enrolment. This study was a single-centre, prospective, randomized comparative study. The primary outcome was treatment failure within 72 hours after extubation. Patients who were screened positive for extubation were enrolled in the study and randomized into the HFNC group and NIV group using a computer-generated simple randomization chart. The treatment failure was defined as a return to invasive mechanical ventilation, or a switch in respiratory support modality (i.e., changing from HFNC to NIV or from NIV to HFNC). Of 72 patients, 62 patients were included in the study. Treatment failure occurred in 8 patients (26.67 %) in HFNC group and 8 patients in NIV group (25%) (p=0.881). The mean duration of ICU stay in HFNC group was 5.47±2.26 days and 6.56±3.39 in NIV group (p=0.376). In the current study, HFNC was non-inferior to NIV in preventing post-extubation respiratory failure in COPD patients, while HFNC had better treatment tolerance.

Evaluation and Performance of a Positive Airway Pressure Device (CPAP-AirFlife™): A Randomized Crossover Non-Inferiority Clinical Study in Normal Subjects

Background and Objectives: During the COVID-19, the demand for non-invasive ventilatory support equipment significantly increased. In response, a novel non-invasive ventilatory support model called CPAP-AirFlife™ was developed utilizing existing technologies. This model offers technological advantages, including an aerosol-controlled helmet suitable for high-risk environments such as ambulances. Additionally, it is cost-effective and does not require medical air, making it accessible for implementation in low-level hospitals, particularly in rural areas. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of CPAP-AirFlife™ by conducting a non-inferiority comparison with conventional ventilation equipment used in the Intensive Care Unit. Materials and Methods: A clinical study was conducted on normal subjects in a randomized and sequential manner. Parameters such as hemoglobin oxygen saturation by pulse oximetry, exhaled PCO2 levels, vital signs, and individual tolerance were compared between the CPAP-AirFlife™ and conventional equipment. The study population was described in terms of demographic characteristics and included in the analysis. Results: It was shown that the CPAP-AirFlife™ was not inferior to conventional equipment in terms of efficacy or tolerability. Hemoglobin oxygen saturation levels, exhaled PCO2 levels, vital signs, and individual tolerance did not significantly differ between the two models. Conclusions: The findings suggest that CPAP-AirFlife™ is a practical and cost-effective alternative for non-invasive ventilatory support. Its technological advantages, including the aerosol-controlled helmet, make it suitable for high-risk environments. The device's accessibility and affordability make it a promising solution for implementation in low-level hospitals, particularly in rural areas. This study supports using CPAP-AirFlife™ as a practical option for non-invasive ventilatory support, providing a valuable contribution to respiratory care during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

Effect of high-flow nasal cannula versus non-invasive ventilation in preventing re-intubation in high-risk chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients: A randomised controlled trial

Background

Currently, a high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has been shown to improve extubation outcomes. However, there is a lack of evidence on the utilisation of HFNC in high-risk chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of HFNC versus non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in preventing re-intubation following planned extubation in high-risk COPD patients.

Patients and Methods

In this prospective, randomised, controlled trial, 230 mechanically ventilated COPD patients at high risk for re-intubation who fulfilled the criteria for planned extubation were enrolled. Post-extubation blood gases and vital signs at 1, 24, and 48 hours were recorded. The primary outcome was the re-intubation rate within 72 hours. Secondary outcomes included post-extubation respiratory failure, respiratory infection, intensive care unit and hospital length of stay, and mortality rate at 60 days.

Results

230 patients after planned extubation were randomly allocated to receive either HFNC (n = 120) or NIV (n = 110). Re-intubation within 72 hours was significantly lower in the high-flow group: 8 patients (6.6%) versus 23 patients (20.9%) in the NIV group {absolute difference, 14.3% [95% confidence interval (CI), 10.9-16.3]; P = 0.001}. The frequency of post-extubation respiratory failure was less in patients assigned to HFNC than in those allocated NIV (25% vs. 35.4%) [absolute difference, 10.4% (95% CI, 2.4-14.3); P = 0.001]. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding reasons for respiratory failure after extubation. It was observed that the 60-day mortality rate was lower in patients who received HFNC than in those assigned to NIV (5% vs. 13.6%) [absolute difference, 8.6 (95% CI, 4.3 to 9.10); P = 0.001].

Conclusion

The use of HFNC after extubation appears to be superior to NIV in reducing the risk of re-intubation within 72 hours and 60-day mortality in high-risk COPD patients.

Acute Hypercapnic Respiratory Failure in COPD

COPD is a progressive inflammatory process affecting both the airways and alveolar structures of the lungs. Exacerbations of COPD are episodes of acute worsening of this inflammatory process, often triggered by infections. The most severe exacerbations are characterized by substantial air trapping and inspiratory muscle overload, which leads to hypercapnic respiratory failure. Pharmacologic therapies focus on intense bronchodilator administration (usually by aerosol), corticosteroids, and antibiotics. Respiratory life support technologies are often needed for severe exacerbations and range from carefully titrated supplemental O2 administration to positive-pressure ventilation (both invasive and noninvasive). Future life support strategies will likely involve extracorporeal life support technologies.

Noninvasive respiratory support after extubation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The effect of noninvasive respiratory support (NRS), including high-flow nasal oxygen, bi-level positive airway pressure and continuous positive airway pressure (noninvasive ventilation (NIV)), for preventing and treating post-extubation respiratory failure is still unclear. Our objective was to assess the effects of NRS on post-extubation respiratory failure, defined as re-intubation secondary to post-extubation respiratory failure (primary outcome). Secondary outcomes included the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), discomfort, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital mortality, ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS), and time to re-intubation. Subgroup analyses considered "prophylactic" versus "therapeutic" NRS application and subpopulations (high-risk, low-risk, post-surgical and hypoxaemic patients).

METHODS

We undertook a systematic review and network meta-analysis (Research Registry: reviewregistry1435). PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, Scopus and Web of Science were searched (from inception until 22 June 2022). Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the use of NRS after extubation in ICU adult patients were included.

RESULTS

32 RCTs entered the quantitative analysis (5063 patients). Compared with conventional oxygen therapy, NRS overall reduced re-intubations and VAP (moderate certainty). NIV decreased hospital mortality (moderate certainty), and hospital and ICU LOS (low and very low certainty, respectively), and increased discomfort (moderate certainty). Prophylactic NRS did not prevent extubation failure in low-risk or hypoxaemic patients.

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic NRS may reduce the rate of post-extubation respiratory failure in ICU patients.

High-Flow Nasal Oxygen versus Noninvasive Ventilation in Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) can be used in stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients, but the effect of HFNC on clinical outcomes in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) is still uncertain.

Methods

We searched electronic literature databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing HFNC with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in hypercapnic patients with AECOPD. The primary endpoint of this meta-analysis was PaCO₂, PaO_2, and SpO₂. The secondary outcomes were the respiratory rate, mortality, complications, and intubation rate.

Results

We included 7 RCTs with a total of 481 patients. There were no significant differences on measures of PaCO₂ (MD = -0.42, 95%CI -3.60 to 2.75, Z = 0.26, and P = 0.79), PaO₂ (MD = -1.36, 95%CI -4.69 to 1.97, Z = 0.80, and P = 0.42), and SpO₂ (MD = -0.78, 95%CI -1.67 to 0.11, Z = 1.72, P = 0.08) between the HFNC group and the NIV group. There was no significant difference in measures of the mortality and intubation rate between the HFNC group (OR = 0.72, 95%CI 0.30 to 1.69, Z = 0.76, and P = 0.44) and the NIV group (OR = 2.38, 95%CI 0.49 to 11.50, Z = 1.08, and P = 0.28), respectively. But the respiratory rate in the HFNC group was lower than that in the NIV group (MD = -1.13, 95%CI -2.13 to -0.14, Z = 2.23, and P = 0.03), and fewer complications were found in the HFNC group (OR = 0.26, 95%CI 0.14 to 0.47, Z = 4.46, and P < 0.00001).

Conclusion

NIV was noninferior to HFNC in decreasing PaCO₂ and increasing PaO₂ and SpO₂. Similarly, the mortality and intubation rate was similar among the two groups. The respiratory rate and complications were inferior in the AECOPD group treated with HFNC.

Effect of different ventilation modalities on the early prognosis of patients with sleep apnea after acute ischemic stroke---protocol for a prospective, open-label and randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Sleep apnea is highly prevalent after acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and has increased stroke-related mortality and morbidity. The conventional sleep apnea treatment is continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) ventilation. However, it is poorly tolerated by patients and is not used in all stroke patients. This protocol describes the impact of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy compared to nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) ventilation or usual care on the early prognosis of patients with sleep apnea after AIS.

METHODS

This randomised controlled study will be conducted in the intensive care unit of the Department of Neurology at the Wuhan Union Hospital. According to the study plan, 150 patients with sleep apnea after AIS will be recruited. All patients are randomly allocated in a 1:1:1 ratio to one of three groups: the nasal catheter group (standard oxygen group), the HFNC group, and the nCPAP group. Patients receive different types of ventilation after admission to the group, and their tolerance while using the different ventilation is recorded. Patients will be followed up by telephone three months after discharge, and stroke recovery is recorded. The primary outcomes were 28-day mortality, the incidence of pulmonary infection and endotracheal intubation.

DISCUSSION

This study analyses different ventilation modalities for early interventions in patients with sleep apnea after AIS. We will investigate whether nCPAP and HFNC reduce early mortality and endotracheal intubation rates and improve distant neurological recovery in patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05323266; 25 March 2022).

Comparison of High Flow Nasal Therapy with Non-Invasive Ventilation and Conventional Oxygen Therapy for Acute Hypercapnic Respiratory Failure: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Purpose

We aimed to evaluate whether high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is an effective and safe method for adult patients with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure (AHRF).

Methods

We searched the Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed databases from inception to August 2022 to obtain randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared HFNC with conventional oxygen treatment (COT) or non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in patients with AHRF, and then performed a meta-analysis.

Results

A total of ten parallel RCTs with 1265 individuals were identified. Of them, two studies compared HFNC with COT and eight studies compared HFNC with NIV. In terms of intubation rate, mortality, and arterial blood gas (ABG) improvement, HFNC showed comparable effects to NIV and COT. However, HFNC was more comfortable (mean difference [MD] -1.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] =-2.59, -1.15, P <0.00001, I² =0%) and resulted in fewer adverse events (odds ratio [OR] 0.12, 95% CI=0.06, 0.28, P<0.00001, I² = 0%), compared with NIV. In comparison to NIV, HFNC could significantly lower heart rate (HR) (MD -4.66, 95% CI=-6.82, -2.50, P <0.0001, I² =0%), respiratory rate (RR) (MD -1.17, 95% CI=-2.03, -0.31, P =0.008, I² =0%), and hospital stay length (MD -0.80, 95% CI=-1.44, -0.16, P =0.01, I² =0%). NIV showed a decreased frequency in the treatment crossover rate, compared with HFNC in patients with pH<7.30 (OR 5.78, 95% CI=1.50, 22.31, P = 0.01, I²: not applicable). Contrary to COT, HFNC could considerably reduce the need for NIV (OR 0.57, 95% CI=0.35, 0.91, P=0.02, I²=0%).

Conclusion

HFNC was effective and safe in patients with AHRF. However, in patients with pH <7.30, HFNC may result in a higher incidence of treatment crossover, compared with NIV. Compared to COT, HFNC may decrease the need for NIV in patients with compensated hypercapnia.

Cost-Effectiveness of Humidified High-Flow Therapy (HHFT) for COPD Patients on Long-Term Oxygen Therapy

Purpose

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the third leading cause of mortality, and is associated with significant respiratory impairment, decreased quality of life, and high health care costs. Recent evidence indicates significant clinical benefit results from adding humidified high-flow therapy (HHFT) to standard long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT) as a home-based therapy in persons with severe COPD. The objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of adding HHFT to standard treatment of COPD patients using LTOT with US healthcare cost estimates.

Patients and Methods

A Markov state-transition model was developed using data from a prospective clinical trial of adding HHFT to standard therapy for persons with severe COPD using LTOT. The analysis was conducted from the US health care system perspective using a 5-year time horizon and 3% discount rate. QALYs and downstream healthcare costs were modeled. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to examine the impact of input parameters on the incremental net monetary benefit (NMB).

Results

Incremental QALYs accrued were 0.058 (2.047 vs 1.989 QALYs for HHFT and standard therapy groups respectively). Incremental total costs were -$3939 ($47,516 vs $51,455 for HHFT and standard therapy groups respectively). Thus, HHFT was the dominant treatment in the analysis, resulting on both better health and lower total costs. Varying utility and cost inputs individually never resulted in NMB approaching 0. Probabilistic analyses indicate that HHFT is cost-effective in 84% of simulations.

Conclusion

Our results indicate that the reductions in acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPDs) that result from adding HHFT for persons with COPD on LTOT will produce both health benefit (QALYs) and cost savings. Cost savings occur because the HHFT device costs are more than offset by reductions in costly COPD exacerbations. Health care systems and payors can benefit from wider implementation of HHFT with existing treatments.

The use of high-flow nasal cannula in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease under exacerbation and stable phases: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has been increasingly utilized in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); however, the effects on reducing the need for intubation or reintubation remain unclear.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to investigate whether HFNC therapy was superior to conventional oxygen therapy (COT) or noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in patients with COPD.

METHODS

A literature search was performed in electronic databases until October 1st, 2022. The primary outcome was the need for intubation/reintubation. All analyses were performed using R (version 4.0.3) and STATA SE (version 15.1).

RESULTS

When HFNC therapy was compared with NIV in patients with COPD under initial respiratory support and postextubation, no significant differences were found in the risk of intubation (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.98) and reintubation (RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.50). Compared to NIV, HFNC therapy did not decrease the partial pressure of carbon dioxide or increase the partial pressure of oxygen to the fraction of inspired oxygen. However, HFNC therapy was associated with a lower incidence of skin breakdown (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.69) and a higher comfort score (SMD 0.90, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.20) than NIV. When HFNC therapy was compared with COT during initial respiratory treatment for COPD exacerbation, a lower risk of treatment failure was found (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.89). When HFNC therapy was compared with long-term oxygen therapy, quality of life (measured by SGRQ-C) was significantly improved (SMD -0.42, 95% CI -0.69 to -0.14).

CONCLUSION

HFNC therapy might be used as an alternative to NIV for COPD exacerbation with mild-moderate hypercapnia under close monitoring and is a potential domiciliary treatment for stable COPD.

Effectiveness of high-flow nasal cannulae compared with noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation in preventing reintubation in patients receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation

Many intensive care unit patients who undergo endotracheal extubation experience extubation failure and require reintubation. Because of the high mortality rate associated with reintubation, postextubation respiratory management is crucial, especially for high-risk populations. We conducted the present study to compare the effectiveness of oxygen therapy administered using high-flow nasal cannulae (HFNC) and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) in preventing reintubation among patients receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation (PMV). This single-center, prospective, unblinded randomized controlled trial was at the respiratory care center (RCC). Participants were randomized to an HFNC group or an NIPPV group (20 patients in each) and received noninvasive respiratory support (NRS) administered using their assigned method. The primary outcome was reintubation within7 days after extubation. None of the patients in the NIPPV group required reintubation, whereas 5 (25%) of the patients in the HFNC group required reintubation (P = 0.047). The 90-day mortality rates of the NIPPV and HFNC groups (four patients [20%] vs. two patients [10%], respectively) did not differ significantly. No significant differences in length of RCC stay, length of hospital stay, time to liberation from NRS, and ventilator-free days at 28-day were identified. The time to event outcome analysis also revealed that the risk of reintubation in the HFNC group was higher than that in the NIPPV group (P = 0.018). Although HFNC is becoming increasingly common as a form of postextubation NRS, HFNC may not be as effective as NIPPV in preventing reintubation among patients who have been receiving PMV for at least 2 weeks. Additional studies evaluating HFNC as an alternative to NIPPV for patients receiving PMV are warranted.ClinicalTrial.gov ID: NCT04564859; IRB number: 20160901R.Trial registration: ClinicalTrial.gov ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04564859 ).

The efficacy of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) versus non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in patients at high risk of extubation failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Studies suggest that high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and non-invasive ventilation (NIV) can prevent reintubation in critically ill patients with a low risk of extubation failure. However, the safety and effectiveness in patients at high risk of extubation failure are still debated. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacies of HFNC and NIV in high-risk patients.

METHODS

We searched eight databases (MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CINAHL Complete, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wan-Fang Database, and Chinese Biological Medical Database) with reintubation as a primary outcome measure. The secondary outcomes included mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), incidence of adverse events, and respiratory function indices. Statistical data analysis was performed using RevMan software.

RESULTS

Thirteen randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with 1457 patients were included. The HFNC and NIV groups showed no differences in reintubation (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.87-1.40, I² = 0%, P = 0.42), mortality (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.82-1.46, I² = 0%, P = 0.54), and respiratory function indices (partial pressure of carbon dioxide [PaCO₂]: MD - 1.31, 95% CI - 2.76-0.13, I² = 81%, P = 0.07; oxygenation index [P/F]: MD - 2.18, 95% CI - 8.49-4.13, I² = 57%, P = 0.50; respiratory rate [Rr]: MD - 0.50, 95% CI - 1.88-0.88, I² = 80%, P = 0.47). However, HFNC reduced adverse events (abdominal distension: RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.04-0.24, I² = 0%, P < 0.01; aspiration: RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.09-1.07, I² = 0%, P = 0.06; facial injury: RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.09-0.88, I² = 0%, P = 0.03; delirium: RR 0.30, 95%CI 0.07-1.39, I² = 0%, P = 0.12; pulmonary complications: RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.46-0.99, I² = 0%, P = 0.05; intolerance: RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.08-0.57, I² = 0%, P < 0.01) and may have shortened LOS (MD - 1.03, 95% CI - 1.86-- 0.20, I² = 93%, P = 0.02). Subgroup analysis by language, extubation method, NIV parameter settings, and HFNC flow rate revealed higher heterogeneity in LOS, PaCO₂, and Rr.

CONCLUSIONS

In adult patients at a high risk of extubation failure, HFNC reduced the incidence of adverse events but did not affect reintubation and mortality. Consequently, whether or not HFNC can reduce LOS and improve respiratory function remains inconclusive.

Noninvasive positive pressure in acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIV) is standard of care for patients with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). We review the most current evidence and highlight areas of uncertainty and ongoing research. We highlight key concepts for the clinician caring for patients with AECOPD which require NIV.

RECENT FINDINGS

Implementation of NIV in AECOPD is not uniform in spite of the evidence and guidelines. Initiation of NIV should be done early and following protocols. Low-intensity NIV remains the standard of care, although research and guidelines are evaluating higher intensity NIV. Scores to predict NIV failure continue to be refined to allow early identification and interventions. Several areas of uncertainty remain, among them are interventions to improve tolerance, length of support and titration and nutritional support during NIV.

SUMMARY

The use of NIV in AECOPD is the standard of care as it has demonstrated benefits in several patient-centered outcomes. Current developments and research is related to the implementation and adjustment of NIV.

The effects of flow settings during high-flow nasal cannula support for adult subjects: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

During high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy, flow plays a crucial role in the physiological effects. However, there is no consensus on the initial flow settings and subsequent titration. Thus, we aimed to systematically synthesize the effects of flows during HFNC treatment.

METHODS

In this systematic review, two investigators independently searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane for in vitro and in vivo studies investigating the effects of flows in HFNC treatment published in English before July 10, 2022. We excluded studies that investigated the pediatric population (< 18 years) or used only one flow. Two investigators independently extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias. The study protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO, CRD42022345419.

RESULTS

In total, 32,543 studies were identified, and 44 were included. In vitro studies evaluated the effects of flow settings on the fraction of inspired oxygen (F_IO₂), positive end-expiratory pressure, and carbon dioxide (CO₂) washout. These effects are flow-dependent and are maximized when the flow exceeds the patient peak inspiratory flow, which varies between patients and disease conditions. In vivo studies report that higher flows result in improved oxygenation and dead space washout and can reduce work of breathing. Higher flows also lead to alveolar overdistention in non-dependent lung regions and patient discomfort. The impact of flows on different patients is largely heterogeneous.

INTERPRETATION

Individualizing flow settings during HFNC treatment is necessary, and titrating flow based on clinical findings like oxygenation, respiratory rates, ROX index, and patient comfort is a pragmatic way forward.

High-Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen Therapy versus Non-Invasive Ventilation in AIDS Patients with Acute Respiratory Failure: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Acute respiratory failure (ARF) remains the most common diagnosis for intensive care unit (ICU) admission in acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) patients.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center, prospective, open-labeled, randomized controlled trial at the ICU, Beijing Ditan Hospital, China. AIDS patients with ARF were enrolled and randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy or non-invasive ventilation (NIV) immediately after randomization. The primary outcome was the need for endotracheal intubation on day 28.

RESULTS

120 AIDS patients were enrolled and 56 patients in the HFNC group and 57 patients in the NIV group after secondary exclusion. Pneumocystis pneumonia (PCP) was the main etiology for ARF (94.7%). The intubation rates on day 28 were similar to HFNC and NIV (28.6% vs. 35.1%, p = 0.457). Kaplan-Meier curves showed no statistical difference in cumulative intubation rates between the two groups (log-rank test 0.401, p = 0.527). The number of airway care interventions in the HFNC group was fewer than in the NIV group (6 (5-7) vs. 8 (6-9), p < 0.001). The rate of intolerance in the HFNC group was lower than in the NIV group (1.8% vs. 14.0%, p = 0.032). The VAS scores of device discomfort in the HFNC group were lower than that in the NIV group at 2 h (4 (4-5) vs. 5 (4-7), p = 0.042) and at 24 h (4 (3-4) vs. 4 (3-6), p = 0.036). The respiratory rate in the HFNC group was lower than that in the NIV group at 24 h (25 ± 4/min vs. 27 ± 5/min, p = 0.041).

CONCLUSIONS

Among AIDS patients with ARF, there was no statistical significance of the intubation rate between HFNC and NIV. HFNC had better tolerance and device comfort, fewer airway care interventions, and a lower respiratory rate than NIV.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

Chictr.org (ChiCTR1900022241).

High-flow nasal cannula therapy with sequential noninvasive ventilation versus noninvasive ventilation alone as the initial ventilatory strategy in acute COPD exacerbations: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) is the recommended mode of ventilation used in acute respiratory failure secondary to an acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). Recent data has shown that high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) treatment can be an alternative for patients with hypercapnic respiratory failure. The purpose of this study is to evaluate HFNC with sequential NIV versus NIV alone as the initial ventilatory strategy in AECOPD.

METHODS

This investigator-initiated, unblinded, single center, randomized controlled trial will be conducted in the emergency department, emergency intensive care unit, or respiratory intensive care unit of a tertiary-care urban teaching hospital. A total of 66 patients will be enrolled and randomized into the intervention group (HFNC with sequential NIV) or the control group (NIV group). The primary endpoint will be the mean difference in PaCO₂ from baseline to 24 h after randomization. Secondary endpoints include the mean difference in PaCO₂ from baseline to 6, 12, and 18 h, as well as the dyspnea score, overall discomfort score, rate of treatment failure, respiratory rate, rate of endotracheal intubation, length of hospital stay, and mortality.

DISCUSSION

Taking the advantages of both HFNC and NIV on AECOPD patients into account, we designed this clinical trial to investigate the combination of these ventilatory strategies. This trial will help us understand how HFNC with sequential NIV compares to NIV alone in treating AECOPD patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR2100054809.

Recent advances in the use of high flow nasal oxygen therapies

High flow nasal oxygen is a relatively new option for treating patients with respiratory failure, which decreases work of breathing, improves tidal volume, and modestly increases positive end expiratory pressure. Despite well-described physiologic benefits, the clinical impact of high flow nasal oxygen is still under investigation. In this article, we review the most recent findings on the clinical efficacy of high flow nasal oxygen in Type I, II, III, and IV respiratory failure within adult and pediatric patients. Additionally, we discuss studies across clinical settings, including emergency departments, intensive care units, outpatient, and procedural settings.

High-Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen Therapy versus Non-Invasive Ventilation for AECOPD Patients After Extubation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objective

To evaluate the clinical efficacy of high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (HFNC) and non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) after extubation.

Research Methods

This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statements. The primary outcome measures analyzed included: reintubation rate, mortality, complication rate, and ICU length of stay.

Results

Eight studies were included, with a total of 612 subjects, including 297 in the HFNC group and 315 in the NIV group. The effect of HFNC and NIV on the reintubation rate of AECOPD patients after extubation, RR (1.49 [95% CI,0.95 to 2.33], P = 0.082). Subgroup analysis with or without hypercapnia according to the included AECOPD population, with hypercapnia, RR (0.69 [95% CI,0.33 to 1.44], P=0.317), without hypercapnia, RR (2.61 [95% CI,1.41 to 4.83], P=0.002). Mortality, RR (0.92 [95% CI,0.56 to 1.52], P = 0.752). ICU length of stay, MD (−0.44 [95% CI,-1.01 to 0.13], P = 0.132). Complication rate, RR (0.22 [95% CI,0.13 to 0.39], P = 0.000). After subgroup analysis, the reintubation rate of HFNC and NIV has no statistical difference in patients with hypercapnia, but NIV can significantly reduce the reintubation rate in patients without hypercapnia. In the outcome measures of complication rate, HFNC significantly reduced complication rate compared with NIV. In mortality and ICU length of stay, analysis results showed that HFNC and NIV were not statistically different.

Conclusion

According to the available evidence, the application of HFNC can be used as an alternative treatment for NIV after extubation in AECOPD patients with hypercapnia, but in the patients without hypercapnia, HFNC is less effective than NIV.

Effect of humidified high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy on respiratory function recovery in stable COPD patients

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of humidified high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNC) on the application effect and respiratory functional recovery of stable COPD patients.

METHODS

The data of 116 patients with stable COPD treated in our hospital from March 2019 to January 2021 were analyzed retrospectively. Among them, 54 patients treated with conventional oxygen therapy (COT) were enrolled into the control group (CG), and the remaining 62 treated with HFNC were divided to the experimental group (EG). The clinical efficacy and adverse reactions of both groups were assessed, and the blood gas analysis indexes pH, PaO₂, PaCO₂, respiratory function indexes FEV1, FEV1%, FEV1/FVC, quality of life and motor recovery were compared.

RESULTS

After treatment, compared with the CG, the FEV1, FEV1% and FEV1/FVC in the EG were obviously higher (P<0.05). Besides, the pH and PaO₂ in the EG were markedly higher (P<0.05), while PaCO₂ was lower (P<0.05). The total effective rate, SGRQ scores and 6MWT in the EG were markedly higher than those in the CG (P<0.05), while the incidence of adverse reactions in the EG was lower (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

HFNC can improve respiratory function and quality of life of stable COPD patients, with higher safety.

Comfort During Non-invasive Ventilation

Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) has been shown to be effective in avoiding intubation and improving survival in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (ARF) when compared to conventional oxygen therapy. However, NIV is associated with high failure rates due, in most cases, to patient discomfort. Therefore, increasing attention has been paid to all those interventions aimed at enhancing patient's tolerance to NIV. Several practical aspects have been considered to improve patient adaptation. In particular, the choice of the interface and the ventilatory setting adopted for NIV play a key role in the success of respiratory assistance. Among the different NIV interfaces, tolerance is poorest for the nasal and oronasal masks, while helmet appears to be better tolerated, resulting in longer use and lower NIV failure rates. The choice of fixing system also significantly affects patient comfort due to pain and possible pressure ulcers related to the device. The ventilatory setting adopted for NIV is associated with varying degrees of patient comfort: patients are more comfortable with pressure-support ventilation (PSV) than controlled ventilation. Furthermore, the use of electrical activity of the diaphragm (EADi)-driven ventilation has been demonstrated to improve patient comfort when compared to PSV, while reducing neural drive and effort. If non-pharmacological remedies fail, sedation can be employed to improve patient's tolerance to NIV. Sedation facilitates ventilation, reduces anxiety, promotes sleep, and modulates physiological responses to stress. Judicious use of sedation may be an option to increase the chances of success in some patients at risk for intubation because of NIV intolerance consequent to pain, discomfort, claustrophobia, or agitation. During the Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic, NIV has been extensively employed to face off the massive request for ventilatory assistance. Prone positioning in non-intubated awake COVID-19 patients may improve oxygenation, reduce work of breathing, and, possibly, prevent intubation. Despite these advantages, maintaining prone position can be particularly challenging because poor comfort has been described as the main cause of prone position discontinuation. In conclusion, comfort is one of the major determinants of NIV success. All the strategies aimed to increase comfort during NIV should be pursued.

Noninvasive respiratory support following extubation in critically ill adults: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Systematic review and network meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy of noninvasive respiratory strategies, including noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) and high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC), in reducing extubation failure among critically ill adults.

METHODS

We searched databases from inception through October 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating noninvasive respiratory support therapies (NIPPV, HFNC, conventional oxygen therapy, or a combination of these) following extubation in critically ill adults. Two reviewers performed screening, full text review, and extraction independently. The primary outcome of interest was reintubation. We used GRADE to rate the certainty of our findings.

RESULTS

We included 36 RCTs (6806 patients). Compared to conventional oxygen therapy, NIPPV (OR 0.65 [95% CI 0.52-0.82]) and HFNC (OR 0.63 [95% CI 0.45-0.87]) reduced reintubation (both moderate certainty). Sensitivity analyses showed that the magnitude of the effect was highest in patients with increased baseline risk of reintubation. As compared to HFNC, no difference in incidence of reintubation was seen with NIPPV (OR 1.04 [95% CI 0.78-1.38], low certainty). Compared to conventional oxygen therapy, neither NIPPV (OR 0.8 [95% CI 0.61-1.04], moderate certainty) or HFNC (OR 0.9 [95% CI 0.66-1.24], low certainty) reduced short-term mortality. Consistent findings were demonstrated across multiple subgroups, including high- and low-risk patients. These results were replicated when evaluating noninvasive strategies for prevention (prophylaxis), but not in rescue (application only after evidence of deterioration) situations.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that both NIPPV and HFNC reduced reintubation in critically ill adults, compared to conventional oxygen therapy. NIPPV did not reduce incidence of reintubation when compared to HFNC. These findings support the preventative application of noninvasive respiratory support strategies to mitigate extubation failure in critically ill adults, but not in rescue conditions.

German S3 Guideline: Oxygen Therapy in the Acute Care of Adult Patients

BACKGROUND

Oxygen (O2) is a drug with specific biochemical and physiological properties, a range of effective doses and may have side effects. In 2015, 14% of over 55,000 hospital patients in the UK were using oxygen. 42% of patients received this supplemental oxygen without a valid prescription. Health care professionals are frequently uncertain about the relevance of hypoxemia and have low awareness about the risks of hyperoxemia. Numerous randomized controlled trials about targets of oxygen therapy have been published in recent years. A national guideline is urgently needed.

METHODS

A national S3 guideline was developed and published within the Program for National Disease Management Guidelines (AWMF) with participation of 10 medical associations. A literature search was performed until February 1, 2021, to answer 10 key questions. The Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (CEBM) System ("The Oxford 2011 Levels of Evidence") was used to classify types of studies in terms of validity. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used for assessing the quality of evidence and for grading guideline recommendation, and a formal consensus-building process was performed.

RESULTS

The guideline includes 34 evidence-based recommendations about indications, prescription, monitoring and discontinuation of oxygen therapy in acute care. The main indication for O2 therapy is hypoxemia. In acute care both hypoxemia and hyperoxemia should be avoided. Hyperoxemia also seems to be associated with increased mortality, especially in patients with hypercapnia. The guideline provides recommended target oxygen saturation for acute medicine without differentiating between diagnoses. Target ranges for oxygen saturation are based depending on ventilation status risk for hypercapnia. The guideline provides an overview of available oxygen delivery systems and includes recommendations for their selection based on patient safety and comfort.

CONCLUSION

This is the first national guideline on the use of oxygen in acute care. It addresses health care professionals using oxygen in acute out-of-hospital and in-hospital settings.

Management of COVID-19-Associated Acute Respiratory Failure with Alternatives to Invasive Mechanical Ventilation: High-Flow Oxygen, Continuous Positive Airway Pressure, and Noninvasive Ventilation

Patients admitted to hospital with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may develop acute respiratory failure (ARF) with compromised gas exchange. These patients require oxygen and possibly ventilatory support, which can be delivered via different devices. Initially, oxygen therapy will often be administered through a conventional binasal oxygen catheter or air-entrainment mask. However, when higher rates of oxygen flow are needed, patients are often stepped up to high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNC), continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP), or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). BiPAP, CPAP, and HFNC may be beneficial alternatives to IMV for COVID-19-associated ARF. Current evidence suggests that when nasal catheter oxygen therapy is insufficient for adequate oxygenation of patients with COVID-19-associated ARF, CPAP should be provided for prolonged periods. Subsequent escalation to IMV may be implemented if necessary.

Management of COVID-19-Associated Acute Respiratory Failure with Alternatives to Invasive Mechanical Ventilation: High-Flow Oxygen, Continuous Positive Airway Pressure, and Noninvasive Ventilation

Patients admitted to hospital with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may develop acute respiratory failure (ARF) with compromised gas exchange. These patients require oxygen and possibly ventilatory support, which can be delivered via different devices. Initially, oxygen therapy will often be administered through a conventional binasal oxygen catheter or air-entrainment mask. However, when higher rates of oxygen flow are needed, patients are often stepped up to high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNC), continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP), or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). BiPAP, CPAP, and HFNC may be beneficial alternatives to IMV for COVID-19-associated ARF. Current evidence suggests that when nasal catheter oxygen therapy is insufficient for adequate oxygenation of patients with COVID-19-associated ARF, CPAP should be provided for prolonged periods. Subsequent escalation to IMV may be implemented if necessary.

Nasal high flow therapy use in wards in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease may spare ICU resources

Nasal high flow therapy has been previously studied for the management of acute hypoxic respiratory failure in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease but the data regarding its use outside of the intensive care unit are sparse. We aimed to evaluate safety and efficacy of nasal high flow therapy outside of the intensive care unit in patients with acute hypoxic respiratory failure and known chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. We conducted a retrospective matched historic cohort study of adult patients with diagnosed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease presenting with acute hypoxic respiratory failure between December 2017 to June 2019, after the initiation of a new protocol, which allowed patients to be managed with nasal high flow therapy on the medical/surgical wards instead of transferring them to the ICU per prior standard of care. Nasal high flow therapy was initiated either in the emergency department or on the medical/surgical wards. Patients were matched with historical cohorts who were managed with prior standard of care based on age, body mass index, comorbidities, and home oxygen use. Primary outcome of interest was difference in rates of mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay, total number of days spent in the intensive care unit, and in-hospital mortality. A total of 90 patients met study inclusion criteria and were matched to 90 historical control patients. Among the study group, 8% required mechanical ventilation versus 9% in the control group (p = 0.79). Hospital length of stay was 7 days in study group versus 6 days in control group (p = 0.02), and in-hospital mortality was the same in both study and control groups at 12% (p = 0.99). Nineteen percent of study group patients required ICU level of care at any time during the admission compared with 49% of control group (p < 0.001). Nasal high flow therapy use in patients with acute hypoxic respiratory failure and underlying chronic obstructive pulmonary disease outside of the intensive care unit may spare ICU resources and cost without delay in definitive care such as mechanical ventilation.

Non-invasive ventilation versus invasive weaning in critically ill adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Extubation to non-invasive ventilation (NIV) has been investigated as a strategy to wean critically ill adults from invasive ventilation and reduce ventilator-related complications.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, proceedings of four conferences and bibliographies (to June 2020) for randomised and quasi-randomised trials that compared extubation with immediate application of NIV to continued invasive weaning in intubated adults and reported mortality (primary outcome) or other outcomes. Two reviewers independently screened citations, assessed trial quality and abstracted data.

RESULTS

We identified 28 trials, of moderate-to-good quality, involving 2066 patients, 44.6% with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Non-invasive weaning significantly reduced mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.57, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.74; high quality), weaning failures (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.81; high quality), pneumonia (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.41; high quality), intensive care unit (ICU) (mean difference (MD) -4.62 days, 95% CI -5.91 to -3.34) and hospital stay (MD -6.29 days, 95% CI -8.90 to -3.68). Non-invasive weaning also significantly reduced the total duration of ventilation, duration of invasive ventilation and duration of ventilation related to weaning (MD -0.57, 95% CI -1.08 to -0.07) and tracheostomy rate. Mortality, pneumonia, reintubation and ICU stay were significantly lower in trials enrolling COPD (vs mixed) populations.

CONCLUSION

Non-invasive weaning significantly reduced mortality, pneumonia and the duration of ventilation related to weaning, particularly in patients with COPD. Beneficial effects are less clear (or more careful patient selection is required) in non-COPD patients.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020201402.

ERS Clinical Practice Guidelines: High-flow nasal cannula in acute respiratory failure

BACKGROUND

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has become a frequently used non-invasive form of respiratory support in acute settings, however evidence supporting its use has only recently emerged. These guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations for the use of HFNC alongside other noninvasive forms of respiratory support in adults with acute respiratory failure (ARF).

MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY

The European Respiratory Society Task Force panel included expert clinicians and methodologists in pulmonology and intensive care medicine. The Task Force used the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) methods to summarize evidence and develop clinical recommendations for the use of HFNC alongside conventional oxygen therapy (COT) and non-invasive ventilation (NIV) for the management of adults in acute settings with ARF.

RESULTS

The Task Force developed 8 conditional recommendations, suggesting using: 1) HFNC over COT in hypoxemic ARF, 2) HFNC over NIV in hypoxemic ARF, 3)HFNC over COT during breaks from NIV, 4) either HFNC or COT in post-operative patients at low risk of pulmonary complications, 5) either HFNC or NIV in post-operative patients at high risk of pulmonary complications, 6) HFNC over COT in non-surgical patients at low risk of extubation failure, 7) NIV over HFNC for patients at high risk of extubation failure unless there are relative or absolute contraindications to NIV, 8) trialling NIV prior to use of HFNC in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and hypercapnic ARF.

CONCLUSIONS

HFNC is a valuable intervention in adults with ARF. These conditional recommendations can assist clinicians in choosing the most appropriate form of non-invasive respiratory support to provide to patients in different acute settings.

The efficacy and safety of high-flow nasal cannula therapy in patients with COPD and type II respiratory failure: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Background

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) have been used for the treatment of COPD and respiratory failure in clinical settings. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of HFNC therapy in patients with COPD and type II respiratory failure, to provide evidence to the clinical COPD management.

Methods

We searched Cochrane et al. databases up to Dec 31, 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the use of HFNC therapy in patients with COPD and type II respiratory failure. Two researchers independently screened the literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and evaluated the quality of the literature and extracted data. We used Revman5.3 software for statistical analysis of collected data.

Results

A total of 6 RCTs involving 525 COPD and type II respiratory failure patients. Meta-analyses indicated that compared with NIV, HFNC could significantly reduce PaCO₂ level (MD = − 2.64, 95% CI (− 3.12 to − 2.15)), length of hospital stay ((MD = – 1.19, 95 CI (− 2.23 to − 0.05)), the incidence of nasal facial skin breakdown ((OR = 0.11, 95% CI (0.03–0.41)). And there were no significant differences between the two groups in PaO₂ ((MD = 2.92, 95% CI (− 0.05 to 5.90)), incidence of tracheal intubation ((OR = 0.74, 95% CI (0.34–1.59)) and mortality (OR = 0.77, 95% CI (0.28–2.11)).

Conclusions

HFNC is more advantageous over NIV in the treatment of COPD and type II respiratory failure. Future studies with larger sample size and strict design are needed to further elucidate the role of HFNC in COPD and respiratory failure.

Effect of sequential high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy and non-invasive positive-pressure ventilation in patients with difficult weaning from mechanical ventilation after extubation on respiratory mechanics

Background

Patients with difficult weaning who undergo mechanical ventilation are more likely to be at risk of reintubation and the sequential use of oxygen therapy after extubation is a concern for clinicians. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to compare the effects of transnasal high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy and non-invasive positive-pressure ventilation (NIV) on respiratory mechanics in patients with difficult weaning.

Methods

The present study was a single-center, retrospective, observational study. Twenty-nine patients with difficult weaning off invasive mechanical ventilation from the Department of Critical Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, from December 2018 to April 2021, were included. Within 48 h after extubation, alternate respiratory support with HFNC and NIV was provided. Relevant indicators were recorded after each support mode had been maintained for at least 60 min. These included esophageal pressure (Pes), gastric pressure (Pga), transdiaphragmatic pressure (Pdi), pressure-time product of Pes (PTPes), pressure-time product of Pga (PTPga), pressure-time product of Pdi (PTPdi), ratio of the PTPdi to the PTPes (PTPdi/PTPes), and ratio of the Pes to the Pdi (Pes/Pdi), diaphragmatic electromyogram (EMGdi), percentage of esophageal pressure coefficient of variation (CVes%),diaphragmatic electromyogram coefficient of variation (CVEMG),inspiratory time (Ti), expiratory time (Te) and respiratory cycle time (Ttot).

Results

Of the 29 patients included, 22 were males and 7 were females [age: 63.97±15.34 years, Acute Physiological and Chronic Health Estimation II (APACHE II) score: 18.00±5.63]. The CVes% and the Pes/Pdi were significantly higher in patients with NIV than HFNC using 40 L/min, CVes%: 9 (−6, 20) vs. −7 (−23, 6) and Pes/Pdi: 0.17 (−0.1, 0.53), vs. −0.12 (−0.43, 0.08) (P<0.05). The remaining indicators were not statistically different.

Conclusions

The sequential NIV and HFNC can be tolerated in patients with such difficult weaning off mechanical ventilation after extubation, and more patients tend to choose HFNC subjectively. Compared with HFNC, NIV reduces the work of adjunctive respiratory muscle, but the patient’s Pes dispersion is high when NIV is used, and it is necessary to pay attention to patient–ventilator coordination in clinical practice. We recommend alternating HFNC and NIV during the sequential respiratory therapy after extubation.

High-flow nasal cannula therapy: A multicentred survey of the practices among physicians and respiratory therapists in Singapore

BACKGROUND

Use of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has become a regular intervention in the intensive care units especially in patients coming in with hypoxaemic respiratory failure. Clinical practices may differ from published literature.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to determine the clinical practices of physicians and respiratory therapists (RTs) on the use of HFNC.

METHODS

A retrospective observational study looking at medical records on HFNC usage from January 2015 to September 2017 was performed and was followed by a series of questions related to HFNC practices. The survey involved physicians and RTs in intensive care units from multiple centres in Singapore from January to April 2018. Indications and thresholds for HFNC usage with titration and weaning practices were compared with the retrospective observational study data.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-three recipients (69.9%) responded to the survey and reported postextubation (87.8%), pneumonia in nonimmunocompromised (65.9%), and pneumonia in immunocompromised (61.8%) patients as the top three indications for HFNC. Of all, 39.8% of respondents wanted to use HFNC for palliative intent. Similar practices were observed in the retrospective study with the large cohort of 63% patients (483 of the total 768 patients) where HFNC was used for acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure and 274 (35.7%) patients to facilitate extubation. The survey suggested that respondents would initiate HFNC at a lower fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO₂), higher partial pressure of oxygen to FiO₂ ratio, and higher oxygen saturation to FiO₂ ratio for nonpneumonia patients than patients with pneumonia. RTs were less likely to start HFNC for patients suffering from pneumonia and interstitial lung disease than physicians. RTs also preferred adjustment of FiO₂ to improve oxygen saturations and noninvasive ventilation for rescue.

CONCLUSIONS

Among the different intensive care units surveyed, the indications and thresholds for the initiation of HFNC differed in the clinical practices of physicians and RTs.

[German S3 Guideline - Oxygen Therapy in the Acute Care of Adult Patients]

BACKGROUND

 Oxygen (O₂) is a drug with specific biochemical and physiologic properties, a range of effective doses and may have side effects. In 2015, 14 % of over 55 000 hospital patients in the UK were using oxygen. 42 % of patients received this supplemental oxygen without a valid prescription. Healthcare professionals are frequently uncertain about the relevance of hypoxemia and have low awareness about the risks of hyperoxemia. Numerous randomized controlled trials about targets of oxygen therapy have been published in recent years. A national guideline is urgently needed.

METHODS

 A S3-guideline was developed and published within the Program for National Disease Management Guidelines (AWMF) with participation of 10 medical associations. Literature search was performed until Feb 1st 2021 to answer 10 key questions. The Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (CEBM) System ("The Oxford 2011 Levels of Evidence") was used to classify types of studies in terms of validity. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used and for assessing the quality of evidence and for grading guideline recommendation and a formal consensus-building process was performed.

RESULTS

 The guideline includes 34 evidence-based recommendations about indications, prescription, monitoring and discontinuation of oxygen therapy in acute care. The main indication for O₂ therapy is hypoxemia. In acute care both hypoxemia and hyperoxemia should be avoided. Hyperoxemia also seems to be associated with increased mortality, especially in patients with hypercapnia. The guideline provides recommended target oxygen saturation for acute medicine without differentiating between diagnoses. Target ranges for oxygen saturation are depending on ventilation status risk for hypercapnia. The guideline provides an overview of available oxygen delivery systems and includes recommendations for their selection based on patient safety and comfort.

CONCLUSION

 This is the first national guideline on the use of oxygen in acute care. It addresses healthcare professionals using oxygen in acute out-of-hospital and in-hospital settings. The guideline will be valid for 3 years until June 30, 2024.

Efficacy of High-Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen Therapy in Patients with Mild Hypercapnia

Objectives

To investigate the indications of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy among patients with mild hypercapnia and to explore the predictors of intubation when HFNC fails.

Methods

This retrospective study was conducted based on the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV (MIMIC-IV) database. Adult patients with mild hypercapnia (45 < PaCO₂ ≤ 60 mmHg) received either HFNC or non-invasive ventilation (NIV) oxygen therapy. Propensity score matching (PSM) was implemented to increase between-group comparability. The Kaplan–Meier method was used to estimate overall survival and cumulative intubation rates, while 28-day mortality and 48-h and 28-day intubation rates were compared using the Chi-squared test. The predictive performances of HR/SpO₂ and the ROX index (the ratio of SpO₂/FiO₂ to respiratory rate) at 4 h were assessed regarding HFNC failure, which was determined if intubation was given within 48 h after the initiation of oxygen therapy. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for HR/SpO₂ and the ROX index were calculated and compared.

Results

A total of 524,520 inpatient hospitalization records were screened, 106 patients in HFNC group and 106 patients in NIV group were successfully matched. No significant difference in 48-h intubation rate between the HFNC group (the treatment group) and the NIV group (the control group) (14.2% vs. 8.5%, p = 0.278); patients receiving HFNC had higher 28-day intubation rate (26.4% vs. 14.2%, p = 0.029), higher 28-day mortality (17.9% vs. 8.5%, p = 0.043), and longer ICU length of stay (4.4 vs. 3.3 days, p = 0.019), compared to those of NIV group. The AUC of HR/SpO₂ at 4 h after the initiation of HFNC yielded around 0.660 for predicting 48-h intubation, greater than that of the ROX index with an AUC of 0.589 (p < 0.01).

Conclusion

Patients with impending respiratory failure had lower intubation rate, shorter ICU length of stay, and lower mortality when treated mild hypercapnia with NIV over HFNC. As opposed to the ROX index, a modest, yet improved predictive performance is demonstrated using HR/SpO₂ in predicting the failure of HFNC among these patients.

Effects of high-flow nasal oxygen cannula versus other noninvasive ventilation in extubated patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to compare the effects of high-flow nasal oxygen cannula (HFNC) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in extubated patients with respiratory insufficiency.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, PubMed, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to 28 February 2021, to identify randomized controlled trials. The primary outcome was reintubation within 24-72 hours after a planned extubation. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Six articles with1746 patients were included. The effect of HFNC on the reintubation rate was noninferior to that of NIV (OR = 1.11, 95% CI: 0.85-1.44). The rate of treatment failure was 20.40% with HFNC versus 20.92% with NIV; this difference was nonsignificant (OR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.72-1.32, P = 0.85). HFNC reduced the rates of skin lesion occurrence (10.28% versus 23.82%, OR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.26-0.53, P < 0.00001) and post-extubation respiratory failure (23.76% versus 25.56%, OR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.46-0.88, P = 0.006), compared with NIV.

CONCLUSIONS

In extubated patients, HFNC was noninferior to NIV in the rate of reintubation and treatment failure. Compared with NIV, HFNC decreased the occurrence of skin lesions and post-extubation respiratory failure.

An Integrated Model including the ROX Index to Predict the Success of High-Flow Nasal Cannula Use after Planned Extubation: A Retrospective Observational Cohort Study

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy is commonly used to prevent reintubation after planned extubation. In clinical practice, there are no appropriate tools to evaluate whether HFNC therapy was successful or failed after planned extubation. In this retrospective observational study, we investigated whether the use of the ROX index was appropriate to differentiate between HFNC success and failure within 72 h after extubation and to develop an integrated model including the ROX index to improve the prediction of HFNC success in patients receiving HFNC therapy after planned extubation. Of 276 patients, 50 patients (18.1%) were reintubated within 72 h of extubation. ROX index values of >8.7 at 2 h, >8.7 at 6 h, and >10.4 at 12 h after HFNC therapy were all meaningful predictors of HFNC success in extubated patients. In addition, the integrated model including the ROX index had a better predictive capability for HFNC success than the ROX index alone. In conclusion, the ROX index at 2, 6, and 12 h could be applied to extubated patients to predict HFNC success after planned extubation. To improve its predictive power, we should also consider an integrated model consisting of the ROX index, sex, body mass index, and the total duration of ventilator care.

Effect of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy reduces the arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide and acute exacerbation but does not increase exercise capacity or decrease hospitalisation or mortality. The study aimed to test the hypothesis that in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients, the use of high-flow nasal cannula decreases arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide and increases the partial pressure of oxygen and 6-min walking distance.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane library were searched for eligible studies published from database inception to November 2020 (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist). The primary outcomes were partial pressure of carbon dioxide and partial pressure of oxygen, and the secondary outcomes were transcutaneous partial pressure of carbon dioxide and 6-min walking distance.

RESULTS

Nine studies (680 patients) were included. high-flow nasal cannula did not decrease partial pressure of carbon dioxide compared with the control interventions (mean difference = -0.81, 95% confidence interval: -2.68 to 1.06, p = .395; I²  = 42.9%, p_{heterogeneity}  = .105). high-flow nasal cannula decreased partial pressure of carbon dioxide compared with long-term oxygen therapy (mean difference = -3.25, 95% confidence interval: -5.65 to -0.85, p = .008; I²  = 0%, p_{heterogeneity}   = .375); no difference was observed for the control modalities. high-flow nasal cannula resulted in better partial pressure of carbon dioxide compared with control interventions in hypoxemic patients (mean difference = -2.59, 95% confidence interval: -4.82 to -0.35, p = .023; I²  = 32.5%, p_{heterogeneity}  = .224), but not in other types of patients. high-flow nasal cannula did not increase partial pressure of oxygen compared with the control interventions (mean difference = 1.17, 95% confidence interval: -1.50 to 3.83, p = .390; I²  = 0%, p_{heterogeneity}  = .660). high-flow nasal cannula decreased transcutaneous carbon dioxide tension (transcutaneous partial pressure of carbon dioxide) compared with the control interventions (mean difference = 2.37, 95% confidence interval: 0.07-4.68, p = .044; I²  = 8.7%, p_{heterogeneity}   = .295). high-flow nasal cannula increased 6-min walking distance compared with the control interventions (mean difference = 18.22, 95% confidence interval: 0.86-,35.57, p = .040; I²  = 0%, p_{heterogeneity}  = .918). The sensitivity analyses showed that the results were robust.

CONCLUSIONS

High-flow nasal cannula did not significantly decrease partial pressure of carbon dioxide or increase partial pressure of oxygen in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients, which is different from the previous meta-analysis, but it decreases transcutaneous partial pressure of carbon dioxide and increased 6-min walking distance.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

This meta-analysis shows that in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, high-flow nasal cannula improves both transcutaneous partial pressure of carbon dioxide and 6-min walking distance, suggesting the high-flow nasal cannula has benefits in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Considering that the literature suggests no impact of high-flow nasal cannula on hospitalisation and mortality, the benefits of high-flow nasal cannula might be limited to the patients who survive the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease events. Still, the global impact of high-flow nasal cannula on the quality of life of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease should be examined.

Effectiveness and Harms of High-Flow Nasal Oxygen for Acute Respiratory Failure: An Evidence Report for a Clinical Guideline From the American College of Physicians

BACKGROUND

Use of high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) for treatment of adults with acute respiratory failure (ARF) has increased.

PURPOSE

To assess HFNO versus noninvasive ventilation (NIV) or conventional oxygen therapy (COT) for ARF in hospitalized adults.

DATA SOURCES

English-language searches of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library from January 2000 to July 2020; systematic review reference lists.

STUDY SELECTION

29 randomized controlled trials evaluated HFNO versus NIV (k = 11) or COT (k = 21).

DATA EXTRACTION

Data extraction by a single investigator was verified by a second, 2 investigators assessed risk of bias, and evidence certainty was determined by consensus.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Results are reported separately for HFNO versus NIV, for HFNO versus COT, and by initial or postextubation management. Compared with NIV, HFNO may reduce all-cause mortality, intubation, and hospital-acquired pneumonia and improve patient comfort in initial ARF management (low-certainty evidence) but not in postextubation management. Compared with COT, HFNO may reduce reintubation and improve patient comfort in postextubation ARF management (low-certainty evidence).

LIMITATIONS

Trials varied in populations enrolled, ARF causes, and treatment protocols. Trial design, sample size, duration of treatment and follow-up, and results reporting were often insufficient to adequately assess many outcomes. Protocols, clinician and health system training, cost, and resource use were poorly characterized.

CONCLUSION

Compared with NIV, HFNO as initial ARF management may improve several clinical outcomes. Compared with COT, HFNO as postextubation management may reduce reintubations and improve patient comfort; HFNO resulted in fewer harms than NIV or COT. Broad applicability, including required clinician and health system experience and resource use, is not well known.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

American College of Physicians. (PROSPERO: CRD42019146691).