scholarly journals High flow nasal therapy versus noninvasive ventilation as initial ventilatory strategy in COPD exacerbation: a multicenter non-inferiority randomized trial

Critical Care ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Cortegiani ◽  
◽  
Federico Longhini ◽  
Fabiana Madotto ◽  
Paolo Groff ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The efficacy and safety of high flow nasal therapy (HFNT) in patients with acute hypercapnic exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) are unclear. Our aim was to evaluate the short-term effect of HFNT versus NIV in patients with mild-to-moderate AECOPD, with the hypothesis that HFNT is non-inferior to NIV on CO2 clearance after 2 h of treatment. Methods We performed a multicenter, non-inferiority randomized trial comparing HFNT and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in nine centers in Italy. Patients were eligible if presented with mild-to-moderate AECOPD (arterial pH 7.25–7.35, PaCO2 ≥ 55 mmHg before ventilator support). Primary endpoint was the mean difference of PaCO2 from baseline to 2 h (non-inferiority margin 10 mmHg) in the per-protocol analysis. Main secondary endpoints were non-inferiority of HFNT to NIV in reducing PaCO2 at 6 h in the per-protocol and intention-to-treat analysis and rate of treatment changes. Results Seventy-nine patients were analyzed (80 patients randomized). Mean differences for PaCO2 reduction from baseline to 2 h were − 6.8 mmHg (± 8.7) in the HFNT and − 9.5 mmHg (± 8.5) in the NIV group (p = 0.404). By 6 h, 32% of patients (13 out of 40) in the HFNT group switched to NIV and one to invasive ventilation. HFNT was statistically non-inferior to NIV since the 95% confidence interval (CI) upper boundary of absolute difference in mean PaCO2 reduction did not reach the non-inferiority margin of 10 mmHg (absolute difference 2.7 mmHg; 1-sided 95% CI 6.1; p = 0.0003). Both treatments had a significant effect on PaCO2 reductions over time, and trends were similar between groups. Similar results were found in both per-protocol at 6 h and intention-to-treat analysis. Conclusions HFNT was statistically non-inferior to NIV as initial ventilatory support in decreasing PaCO2 after 2 h of treatment in patients with mild-to-moderate AECOPD, considering a non-inferiority margin of 10 mmHg. However, 32% of patients receiving HFNT required NIV by 6 h. Further trials with superiority design should evaluate efficacy toward stronger patient-related outcomes and safety of HFNT in AECOPD. Trial registration: The study was prospectively registered on December 12, 2017, in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03370666).

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (06) ◽  
pp. 786-797
Author(s):  
Miquel Ferrer ◽  
Antoni Torres

AbstractNoninvasive ventilation (NIV) is considered to be the standard of care for the management of acute hypercapnic respiratory failure in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation. It can be delivered safely in any dedicated setting, from emergency rooms to high dependency or intensive care units and wards. NIV helps improving dyspnea and gas exchange, reduces the need for endotracheal intubation, and morbidity and mortality rates. It is therefore recognized as the gold standard in this condition. High-flow nasal therapy helps improving ventilatory efficiency and reducing the work of breathing in patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Early studies indicate that some patients with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure can be managed with high-flow nasal therapy, but more information is needed before specific recommendations for this therapy can be made. Therefore, high-flow nasal therapy use should be individualized in each particular situation and institution, taking into account resources, and local and personal experience with all respiratory support therapies.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document