scholarly journals Comparison of hypoxemia, intubation procedure, and complications for non-invasive ventilation against high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy for patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a non-randomized retrospective analysis for effectiveness and safety (NIVaHIC-aHRF)

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chao Zhang ◽  
Min Ou

Abstract Background Optimization of preoxygenation procedure can help to secure the method of intubation by reducing the risks of severe hypoxemia and other problems. There is confusion for efficacy of non-invasive ventilation compared to high-flow oxygen therapy regarding occurrence of severe hypoxemia during the intubation procedure. The purpose of the study was to compare the difference between noninvasive ventilation and high flow oxygen therapy to prevent desaturation during laryngoscopy. Methods Patients underwent high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HCO cohort, n = 161) or non-invasive ventilation procedure (NIV cohort, n = 154) for oxygenation and ventilation due to acute hypoxemic respiratory failure in the intensive care unit. Data before preoxygenation, preoxygenation, intubation, laryngoscopy, and complications of patients due to tracheal intubation were retrospectively collected and analyzed. Results There was no difference between both cohorts for the demographical and clinical conditions of the patients before preoxygenation (p > 0.05 for all parameters), numbers of patients with severe hypoxia during the intubation procedure (35 vs. 45, p = 0.303), the time duration of laryngoscopy (p = 0.847), number of laryngoscopies attempts (p = 0.804), and immediate and late complications during the intubation procedure. The values of pulse oximetry were reported higher for patients of NIV cohort than those of HCO cohort during preoxygenation. Fewer numbers of patients were reported with severe hypoxia among patients of the NIV cohort than those of the HCO cohort (24 vs., 40, p = 0.042) who have moderate-to-severe hypoxemia (partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen ratio ≤ 200 mmHg) before preoxygenation. The most common complications were hypertension, pulmonary aspiration, and increased 30-day mortality. Conclusions When compared, there was no difference between non-invasive ventilation technique and high-flow oxygen therapy to minimize severe hypoxia prior to laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation in patients with acute respiratory failure.

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-56
Author(s):  
К. A. Tsygankov ◽  
I. N. Grachev ◽  
Vladimir I. Shatalov ◽  
А. V. Schegolev ◽  
D. A. Аveryanov ◽  
...  

The objective: to evaluate the effect of high-flow oxygen and non-invasive ventilation on the mortality rate in adults with severe respiratory failure caused by the new coronavirus infection in the intensive care unit (ICU).Subjects and methods. A one-center retrospective study was conducted. Electronic medical files of patients treated in the ICU from April 1 to May 25, 2020, were analyzed. Totally, 101 medical files were selected, further, they were divided into two groups. Group 1 (n = 49) included patients who received oxygen insufflation, and should it fail, they received traditional artificial ventilation. No non-invasive respiratory therapy was used in this group. Group 2 (n = 52) included patients who received high-flow oxygen therapy and non-invasive ventilation. The mortality rate in the groups made a primary endpoint for assessing the impact of high-flow oxygen therapy and non-invasive ventilation. The following parameters were also analyzed: drug therapy, the number of patients in whom non-invasive techniques were used taking into account the frequency of cases when these techniques failed, and the number of patients in whom artificial ventilation was initiated.Results. In Group 2, non-invasive methods of respiratory therapy were used in 31 (60%) cases. High-flow oxygen therapy was used in 19 (36%) of them; in 13 cases this method allowed weaning them from the high flow. Non-invasive ventilation was used in 18 cases, in 12 patients it was used due to progressing severe respiratory failure during humidified oxygen insufflation, in 6 patients – after the failed high-flow oxygen therapy. In Group 1, 25 (51%) patients were intubated and transferred to artificial ventilation, in Group 2, 10 (19.2%) underwent the same. The lethal outcome was registered in 23 (47%) cases in Group 1, and in 10 (19.2%) in Group 2 (p = 0.004). Analysis of drug therapy in the groups revealed the difference in the prescription of pathogenetic therapy. Logistic regression demonstrated the effectiveness of the combination of tocilizumab + a glucocorticoid in reducing the frequency of lethal cases (p = 0.001).Conclusion. The use of non-invasive respiratory support in adults with severe respiratory failure caused by the new coronavirus infection combined with therapy by tocilizumab + a glucocorticoid can reduce the incidence of lethal cases.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. e045659
Author(s):  
René Robert ◽  
Denis Frasca ◽  
Julie Badin ◽  
C Girault ◽  
Christophe Guitton ◽  
...  

IntroductionA palliative approach to intensive care unit (ICU) patients with acute respiratory failure and a do-not-intubate order corresponds to a poorly evaluated target for non-invasive oxygenation treatments. Survival alone should not be the only target; it also matters to avoid discomfort and to restore the patient’s quality of life. We aim to conduct a prospective multicentre observational study to analyse clinical practices and their impact on outcomes of palliative high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (HFOT) and non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in ICU patients with do-not-intubate orders.Methods and analysisThis is an investigator-initiated, multicentre prospective observational cohort study comparing the three following strategies of oxygenation: HFOT alone, NIV alternating with HFOT and NIV alternating with standard oxygen in patients admitted in the ICU for acute respiratory failure with a do-not-intubate order. The primary outcome is the hospital survival within 14 days after ICU admission in patients weaned from NIV and HFOT. The sample size was estimated at a minimum of 330 patients divided into three groups according to the oxygenation strategy applied. The analysis takes into account confounding factors by modelling a propensity score.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by the ethics committee and patients will be included after informed consent. The results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNCT03673631


2022 ◽  
Vol 35 (13) ◽  
Author(s):  
Themistoklis Paraskevas ◽  
Eleousa Oikonomou ◽  
Maria Lagadinou ◽  
Vasileios Karamouzos ◽  
Nikolaos Zareifopoulos ◽  
...  

Introduction: Oxygen therapy remains the cornerstone for managing patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 infection and several modalities of non-invasive ventilation are used worldwide. High-flow oxygen via nasal canula is one therapeutic option which may in certain cases prevent the need of mechanical ventilation. The aim of this review is to summarize the current evidence on the use of high-flow nasal oxygen in patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 infection.Material and Methods: We conducted a systematic literature search of the databases PubMed and Cochrane Library until April 2021 using the following search terms: “high flow oxygen and COVID-19” and “high flow nasal and COVID-19’’.Results: Twenty-three articles were included in this review, in four of which prone positioning was used as an adjunctive measure. Most of the articles were cohort studies or case series. High-flow nasal oxygen therapy was associated with a reduced need for invasive ventilation compared to conventional oxygen therapy and led to an improvement in secondary clinical outcomes such as length of stay. The efficacy of high-flow nasal oxygen therapy was comparable to that of other non-invasive ventilation options, but its tolerability is likely higher. Failure of this modality was associated with increased mortality.Conclusion: High flow nasal oxygen is an established option for respiratory support in COVID-19 patients. Further investigation is required to quantify its efficacy and utility in preventing the requirement of invasive ventilation.


Pneumologie ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wolfram Windisch ◽  
Bernd Schönhofer ◽  
Daniel Sebastian Majorski ◽  
Maximilian Wollsching-Strobel ◽  
Carl-Peter Criée ◽  
...  

ZusammenfassungIn der Corona-Pandemie werden zunehmend nicht-invasive Verfahren zur Behandlung des akuten hypoxämischen Versagens bei COVID-19 eingesetzt. Hier stehen mit der HFOT (high-flow oxygen therapy), CPAP (continuous positive airway pressure) und der NIV (non-invasive ventilation) unterschiedliche Verfahren zur Verfügung, die das Ziel einer Intubationsvermeidung verfolgen. Der aktuelle Übersichtsartikel fasst die heterogene Studienlage zusammen. Wesentlich ist die Erkenntnis, dass diese nicht-invasiven Verfahren durchaus auch bei einem schweren, akuten hypoxämischen Versagen erfolgreich sein können und damit die Intubation wie auch Tubus-assoziierte Komplikationen vermeiden können. Demgegenüber bleibt aber ebenso zu betonen, dass die prolongierte unterstützte Spontanatmung ebenfalls zu Komplikationen führt und dass demzufolge insbesondere ein spätes NIV-Versagen mit erheblich verschlechterter Prognose einhergeht, was vor dem Hintergrund weiterhin hoher NIV-Versagensraten in Deutschland bedeutsam ist. Der aktuelle Artikel verweist schließlich auch auf einen Parallelartikel in dieser Ausgabe, der die medial in der Öffentlichkeit in Deutschland geführte Debatte zu diesem Thema aufgreift und deren inhaltliche Fragwürdigkeit, aber auch die negativen Auswirkungen auf die Gesellschaft und die Fachwelt adressiert. Gleichzeitig wird die Bedeutung von regelmäßig zu überarbeitenden Leitlinien untermauert.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document