High-flow nasal oxygen therapy in the treatment of acute respiratory failure in severe COVID-19 pneumonia: a prospective observational study

Association between undiagnosed obstructive sleep apnea and severe course of COVID-19: a prospective observational study

PURPOSE

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is associated with many long-term health consequences. We hypothesized that previously unrecognized and untreated OSA may be associated with more severe respiratory failure in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

Patients hospitalized in the Pulmonology Department with confirmed COVID-19, University Hospital in Kraków, Poland, between September 2020 and April 2021 were enrolled. OSA screening questionnaires including Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), STOP-BANG, Berlin questionaire (BQ), OSA-50, and No-SAS were completed. Polygraphy was performed after > 24 h without requirement for supplemental oxygen.

RESULTS

Of 125 patients with median age of 61.0 years, 71% of whom were male. OSA was diagnosed in 103 patients (82%) and was categorized as mild, moderate, and severe in 41 (33%), 30 (24%), and 32 (26%), respectively. Advanced respiratory support was introduced in 85 patients (68%), and 8 (7%) patients eventually required intubation. Multivariable analysis revealed that increased risk of requirement for advanced respiratory support was associated with higher respiratory event index (OR 1.03, 95%CI 1.00 to 1.07), oxygen desaturation index (OR 1.05, 95%CI 1.02 to 1.10), and hypoxic burden (1.02 95% CI 1.00 to 1.03) and lower minimal SpO2 (OR 0.89, 95%CI 0.81 to 0.98), but not with results of OSA screening tools like BQ score (OR 0.66, 95%CI 0.38 to 1.16), STOP-BANG score (OR 0.73, 95%CI 0.51 to 1.01), NoSAS score (OR 1.01, 95%CI 0.87 to 1.18), or OSA50 score (OR 0.84, 95%CI 0.70 to 1.01).

CONCLUSION

Previously undiagnosed OSA was common among hospitalized patients who survived the acute phase of COVID-19. The degree of OSA was associated with the severity of respiratory failure.

The effects of high-flow oxygen therapy on mortality in patients with COVID-19

BACKGROUND

High-flow oxygen therapy (HFOT) has been successful in treating acute hypoxic respiratory failure (AHRF) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Successful treatment with noninvasive ventilation and avoidance of mechanical ventilation (MV) has been associated with decreased mortality and positive patient outcomes. It is unclear whether the evidence supports the use of HFOT to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-induced AHRF and ARDS.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether the use of HFOT decreases the need for intubation or decreases mortality compared with MV in patients with AHRF due to COVID-19.

DATA SOURCES

A literature search was conducted in March 2022 using CINAHL, Embase, PubMed, and Scopus bibliographic databases. Ten studies comparing HFOT and MV in COVID-19 respiratory failure met inclusion criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Nine studies found a statistically significant reduction in the need for intubation; eight studies found significantly decreased morality in patients who received HFOT. Study design and methodologies limited the findings.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Based on the available evidence, the use of HFOT positively affected mortality and incidence of the need for intubation and MV. Further research needs to be conducted before HFOT is adopted as the standard of care for COVID-19-induced AHRF and ARDS. Nurse practitioners should be informed regarding the various respiratory support modalities and evaluate risk versus benefit when caring for patients with COVID-19-induced AHRF and ARDS.

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

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

Early Measurement of ROX Index in Intermediary Care Unit Is Associated with Mortality in Intubated COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective Study

COVID-19 patients often present with rapidly progressing acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, requiring orotracheal intubation with different prognostic issues. However, ICU specialists lack predictive tools to stratify these patients. We conducted a single-center cross-sectional retrospective study to evaluate if the ROX index, measured under non-invasive oxygenation support, can predict ICU mortality in a COVID-19 intubated patient cohort. This study took place in the division of intensive care at the Geneva University Hospitals (Geneva, Switzerland). We included all consecutive adult patients treated by non-invasive oxygenation support and requiring intubation for acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19 between 9 September 2020 and 30 March 2021, corresponding to the second local surge of COVID-19 cases. Baseline demographic data, comorbidities, median ROX between H0 and H8, and clinical outcomes were collected. Overall, 82 patients were intubated after failing a non-invasive oxygenation procedure. Women represented 25.6% of the whole cohort. Median age and median BMI were 70 (60–75) years and 28 (25–33), respectively. Before intubation, the median ROX between H0 and H8 was 6.3 (5.0–8.2). In a multivariate analysis, the median ROX H0–H8 was associated with ICU mortality as a protective factor with an odds ratio (95% CI) = 0.77 (0.60–0.99); p < 0.05. In intubated COVID-19 patients treated initially by non-invasive oxygenation support for acute respiratory failure, the median ROX H0–H8 could be an interesting predictive factor associated with ICU mortality.

Effectiveness of the use of a high-flow nasal cannula to treat COVID-19 patients and risk factors for failure: a meta-analysis

Background:

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread globally, and many patients with severe cases have received oxygen therapy through a high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC).

Objectives:

We assessed the efficacy of HFNC for treating patients with COVID-19 and risk factors for HFNC failure.

Methods:

We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies of HFNC in patients with COVID-19 published in English from January 1st, 2020 to August 15th, 2021. The primary aim was to assess intubation, mortality, and failure rates in COVID-19 patients supported by HFNC. Secondary aims were to compare HFNC success and failure groups and to describe the risk factors for HFNC failure.

Results:

A total of 25 studies fulfilled selection criteria and included 2851 patients. The intubation, mortality, and failure rates were 0.44 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.38–0.51, I² = 84%), 0.23 (95% CI: 0.19–0.29, I² = 88%), and 0.47 (95% CI: 0.42–0.51, I² = 56%), respectively. Compared to the success group, age, body mass index (BMI), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score, D-dimer, lactate, heart rate, and respiratory rate were higher and PaO₂, PaO₂/FiO₂, ROX index (the ratio of SpO₂/FiO₂ to respiratory rate), ROX index after the initiation of HFNC, and duration of HFNC were lower in the failure group (all Ps < 0.05). There were also more smokers and more comorbidities in the failure group (all Ps < 0.05). Pooled odds ratios (ORs) revealed that older age (OR: 1.04, 95% CI: 1.01–1.07, P = 0.02, I² = 88%), a higher white blood cell (WBC) count (OR: 1.06, 95% CI: 1.01–1.12, P = 0.02, I² = 0%), a higher heart rate (OR: 1.42, 95% CI: 1.15–1.76, P < 0.01, I² = 0%), and a lower ROX index(OR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.39–0.95, P = 0.03, I² = 93%) after the initiation of HFNC were all significant risk factors for HFNC failure.

Conclusions:

HFNC is an effective way of providing respiratory support in the treatment of COVID-19 patients. Older age, a higher WBC count, a higher heart rate, and a lower ROX index after the initiation of HFNC are associated with an increased risk of HFNC failure.

When Conventional Oxygen Therapy Fails-The Effectiveness of High-Flow Nasal Oxygen Therapy in Patients with Respiratory Failure in the Course of COVID-19

High-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) is recommended as a first-line treatment in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19. We assessed the effectiveness of HFNO and predictors of failure and death. The medical records of 200 consecutive adult patients treated with HFNO were analysed. Ninety-two patients (46%) were successfully cured, 52 (26%) required noninvasive ventilation, and 61 (30.5%) received intubation. Overall mortality was 40.5%. Risk factors of HFNO ineffectiveness were: SpO₂ ≤ 90% with conventional oxygen therapy (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.19–0.53, p < 0.001), SpO₂ ≤ 74% without oxygen therapy (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.27–0.71, p < 0.001), an age ≥ 60, comorbidities, biomarkers (C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, creatinine, lactate dehydrogenase), duration of symptoms before admission to hospital ≤ 9 days, start of treatment with HFNO ≤ 4 days. The multivariate logistic regression models (age ≥ 60, comorbidities, C-reactive protein concentration and SpO₂ with oxygen therapy) revealed a high predictive value of death and HFNO failure (AUC 0.851, sensitivity 0.780, specificity 0.802; AUC 0.800, sensitivity 0.776, specificity 0.739, respectively). HFNO is a safe method for treating acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, with effectiveness reaching nearly 50%. Low values of SpO₂ without and during oxygen therapy seem to be good diagnostic tools for predicting death and HFNO failure.