Department of Internal Medicine. University Hospital of Patras. Patras.

2022 ◽  
Vol 35 (13) ◽  
Author(s):  
Themistoklis Paraskevas ◽  
Eleousa Oikonomou ◽  
Maria Lagadinou ◽  
Vasileios Karamouzos ◽  
Nikolaos Zareifopoulos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Oxygen Therapy ◽  
Case Series ◽  
High Flow ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Non Invasive Ventilation ◽  
High Flow Oxygen

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.

scholarly journals The impact of non-invasive respiratory support techniques on the lethal outcome frequency in adult with severe respiratory failure caused by the new coronavirus infection

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-56
Author(s):  
К. A. Tsygankov ◽  
I. N. Grachev ◽  
Vladimir I. Shatalov ◽  
А. V. Schegolev ◽  
D. A. Аveryanov ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Respiratory Failure ◽  
Oxygen Therapy ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Severe Respiratory Failure ◽  
Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Non Invasive Ventilation ◽  
High Flow Oxygen ◽  
Coronavirus Infection ◽  
Group 2

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.

Bedeutung nicht-invasiver Verfahren in der Therapie des akuten hypoxämischen Versagens bei COVID-19

Pneumologie ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wolfram Windisch ◽  
Bernd Schönhofer ◽  
Daniel Sebastian Majorski ◽  
Maximilian Wollsching-Strobel ◽  
Carl-Peter Criée ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Continuous Positive Airway Pressure ◽  
Airway Pressure ◽  
Oxygen Therapy ◽  
Positive Airway Pressure ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Non Invasive Ventilation ◽  
High Flow Oxygen ◽  
Invasive Verfahren

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.

scholarly journals Limitations of the ARDS criteria during high-flow oxygen or non-invasive ventilation: Evidence from critically ill COVID-19 patients

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Hultström ◽  
Ola Hellkvist ◽  
Lucian Covaciu ◽  
Filip Fredén ◽  
Robert Frithiof ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
High Flow ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Respiratory Support ◽  
Arterial Oxygen ◽  
Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Steady State Condition ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Non Invasive Ventilation ◽  
High Flow Oxygen

Abstract Introduction The ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen to inspired oxygen fraction (PaO2/FIO2) during invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) is used as criteria to grade the severity of respiratory failure in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). During the SARS-CoV2 pandemic the use of PaO2/FIO2 ratio has been increasingly used in non-invasive respiratory support such as high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and non-invasive ventilation (NIV). The grading of hypoxemia in non-invasively ventilated patients is uncertain. The main hypothesis, investigated in this study, was that the PaO2/FIO2 ratio does not change when switching between MV, NIV and HFNC. Methods This was a sub-study of a single-center prospective observational study of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) at Uppsala University Hospital in Sweden for critical COVID-19. In a steady state condition, the PaO2/FIO2 ratio was recorded before and after any change between two of the studied respiratory support techniques (i.e., HFNC, NIV and MV). Results A total of 148 patients were included in the present analysis. We find that any change in respiratory support from or to HFNC caused a significant change in PaO2/FIO2 ratio (up to 48 mmHg, from HFNC to MV). Changes in respiratory support between NIV and MV did not show consistent change in PaO2/FIO2 ratio. In patients classified as mild to moderate ARDS during MV, the change from HFNC to MV showed a variable increase in PaO2/FIO2 ratio ranging between 52 and 140 mmHg (median of 127 mm Hg). This made prediction of ARDS severity during MV from the apparent ARDS grade during HFNC impossible. Conclusion HFNC is associated with lower PaO2/FIO2 ratio than either NIV or MV in the same patient, while NIV and MV provided similar PaO2/FIO2 and thus ARDS grade by Berlin definition. The large variation of PaO2/FIO2 ratio precludes using ARDS grade as a measure of pulmonary damage during HFNC.

scholarly journals Safety and clinical outcomes of remdesivir in hospitalised COVID-19 patients: a retrospective analysis of active surveillance database

2022 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vaishali Gupte ◽  
Rashmi Hegde ◽  
Sandesh Sawant ◽  
Kabil Kalathingal ◽  
Sonali Jadhav ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Retrospective Analysis ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Oxygen Therapy ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Low Flow ◽  
Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Non Invasive Ventilation ◽  
High Flow Oxygen

Abstract Background Real-world data on safety and clinical outcomes of remdesivir in COVID-19 management is scant. We present findings of data analysis conducted for assessing the safety and clinical outcomes of remdesivir treatment for COVID-19 in India. Methods This retrospective analysis used data from an active surveillance programme database of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 who were receiving remdesivir. Results Of the 2329 patients included, 67.40% were men. Diabetes (29.69%) and hypertension (20.33%) were the most common comorbidities. At remdesivir initiation, 2272 (97.55%) patients were receiving oxygen therapy. Remdesivir was administered for 5 days in 65.38% of patients. Antibiotics (64.90%) and steroids (47.90%) were the most common concomitant medications. Remdesivir was overall well tolerated, and total 119 adverse events were reported; most common were nausea and vomiting in 45.40% and increased liver enzymes in 14.28% patients. 84% of patients were cured/improved, 6.77% died and 9.16% showed no improvement in their clinical status at data collection. Subgroup analyses showed that the mortality rate was significantly lower in patients < 60 years old than in those > 60 years old. Amongst patients on oxygen therapy, the cure/improvement rate was significantly higher in those receiving standard low-flow oxygen than in those receiving mechanical ventilation, non-invasive ventilation, or high-flow oxygen. Factors that were associated with higher mortality were age > 60 years, cardiac disease, diabetes high flow oxygen, non-invasive ventilation and mechanical ventilation. Conclusion Our analysis showed that remdesivir is well tolerated and has an acceptable safety profile. The clinical outcome of cure/improvement was 84%, with a higher improvement in patients < 60 years old and on standard low-flow oxygen.

scholarly journals The CircumVent Project: a CPAP/O2 helmet solution for non-invasive ventilation using an implementation research framework

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aimalohi A. Ahonkhai ◽  
Adesola Z. Musa ◽  
André A. Fenton ◽  
Muktar H. Aliyu ◽  
Igho Ofotokun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Implementation Strategy ◽  
Oxygen Therapy ◽  
Health Workers ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Non Invasive Ventilation ◽  
High Flow Oxygen

Abstract Background Acute respiratory failure, a major cause of death in COVID-19, is managed with high-flow oxygen therapy via invasive mechanical ventilation. In resource-limited settings like Nigeria, the shortage of ventilators and oxygen supply makes this option challenging. Evidence-based non-invasive alternatives to mechanical ventilation such as the use of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) devices exist, but there have been concerns that non-invasive ventilation may expose healthcare workers to infection from aerosolized dispersion of SARS-CoV-2. We propose to evaluate the feasibility, adaptability and acceptability of a CPAP/O2 helmet solution for non-invasive ventilation among patients with COVID-19 and health workers in eight COVID-19 treatment and isolation centers in Nigeria. Methods The study will occur in 4 stages: (1) convene a Steering Committee of key stakeholders and recruit implementation sites; (2) use the integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARiHS) framework to guide a needs assessment of treatment centers’ capacity to use high-flow oxygen therapy to treat COVID-19 patients and utilize the findings to develop an implementation strategy for the use of a CPAP/O2 helmet solution; (3) build infrastructure to support training and data monitoring processes and to develop implementation protocols to evaluate the adaptability of the strategy for the use of the CPAP/O2 helmet; and (4) train health workers, distribute a CPAP/O2 helmet solution for non-invasive ventilation, pilot test the implementation strategy, and assess feasibility of its use and acceptability that includes monitoring altered risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers. Discussion The CPAP/O2 helmet solution for non-invasive ventilation in Nigeria can serve as a scalable model for resource-poor countries, and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic, has the potential to be deployed for the treatment of pneumonia and other respiratory diseases. Trial registration NCT04929691. Registered June 18, 2021—retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04929691

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document