scholarly journals Awake Prone Positioning, High-Flow Nasal Oxygen and Non-Invasive Ventilation as Non-Invasive Respiratory Strategies in COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2022 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 391
Author(s):  
Benedikt Schmid ◽  
Mirko Griesel ◽  
Anna-Lena Fischer ◽  
Carolina S. Romero ◽  
Maria-Inti Metzendorf ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Respiratory Failure ◽  
Acute Respiratory Failure ◽  
Standard Care ◽  
Composite Endpoint ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Intubation Rate ◽  
Prone Positioning ◽  
Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Non Invasive Ventilation

Background: Acute respiratory failure is the most important organ dysfunction of COVID-19 patients. While non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen are frequently used, efficacy and safety remain uncertain. Benefits and harms of awake prone positioning (APP) in COVID-19 patients are unknown. Methods: We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing HFNC vs. NIV and APP vs. standard care. We meta-analyzed data for mortality, intubation rate, and safety. Results: Five RCTs (2182 patients) were identified. While it remains uncertain whether HFNC compared to NIV alters mortality (RR: 0.92, 95% CI 0.65–1.33), HFNC may increase rate of intubation or death (composite endpoint; RR 1.22, 1.03–1.45). We do not know if HFNC alters risk for harm. APP compared to standard care probably decreases intubation rate (RR 0.83, 0.71–0.96) but may have little or no effect on mortality (RR: 1.08, 0.51–2.31). Conclusions: Certainty of evidence is moderate to very low. There is no compelling evidence for either HFNC or NIV, but both carry substantial risk for harm. The use of APP probably has benefits although mortality appears unaffected.

scholarly journals Comparison of high-flow nasal oxygen therapy and non-invasive ventilation in ICU patients with acute respiratory failure and a do-not-intubate orders: a multicentre prospective study OXYPAL

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. e045659
Author(s):  
René Robert ◽  
Denis Frasca ◽  
Julie Badin ◽  
C Girault ◽  
Christophe Guitton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Respiratory Failure ◽  
Acute Respiratory Failure ◽  
Oxygen Therapy ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Clinical Practices ◽  
Icu Patients ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Non Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Registration Number

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

scholarly journals Use of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in patients with acute respiratory failure in emergency departments: a systematized review

2021 ◽  
Vol 106 (106(813)) ◽  
pp. 188-197
Author(s):  
M.R. Matabuena-Gómez-Limón ◽  
F. Leiva-Cepas
Keyword(s):  
Respiratory Failure ◽  
Acute Respiratory Failure ◽  
Emergency Departments ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Early Management ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Nasal Cannulae ◽  
Non Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Hospitalization Period

The aim of this study si to revise the use of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in patients with acute respiratory failure in emergency departments. A systematized database review will be carried out by the search of articles attending the presented subject following a unique approach; restricting the results to findings in the last five years either in Spanish or English. A research performed in paediatric population concluded that the early management of acute respiratory failure and the use of high flow nasal cannulae reduced the hospitalization period and the referral to specialized hospitals, and gave more independence to regional hospitals in its management; reducing, therefore, the number of patients needing the implementation of invasive procedures. With respect to patients with exacerbations of the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and its early management in the prehospital care, an increase in the mortality in those patients who were exposed to high flow compared to the conventional oxygen therapy was observed. Following the results of a meta-analysis, no benefits were found in the use of high flow nasal cannulae opposed to the conventional therapy or NIV in the emergency departments, in terms of need for intubations, failures in the treatment, hospitalization and mortality.The data are inconclusive in all the studies analyzed and there is no agreement between the different authors. There is a scarce piece of bibliography regarding the use of NIV in the emergency departments due to the fact that the majority of the research are focused on the use of this techniques in intensive care units. In conclussion, there is a diversity in the results of the revised articles according to the use of NIV in the emergency departments.

scholarly journals Non-invasive ventilation for SARS-CoV-2 acute respiratory failure: a subanalysis from the HOPE COVID-19 registry

2021 ◽  
Vol 38 (5) ◽  
pp. 359-365
Author(s):  
Maurizio Bertaina ◽  
Ivan J Nuñez-Gil ◽  
Luca Franchin ◽  
Inmaculada Fernández Rozas ◽  
Ramón Arroyo-Espliguero ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Respiratory Failure ◽  
Acute Respiratory Failure ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Significant Proportion ◽  
Composite Endpoint ◽  
Hospital Death ◽  
Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Non Invasive Ventilation

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has seriously challenged worldwide healthcare systems and limited intensive care facilities, leading to physicians considering the use of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) for managing SARS-CoV-2-related acute respiratory failure (ARF).MethodsWe conducted an interim analysis of the international, multicentre HOPE COVID-19 registry including patients admitted for a confirmed or highly suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection until 18 April 2020. Those treated with NIV were considered. The primary endpoint was a composite of death or need for intubation. The components of the composite endpoint were the secondary outcomes. Unadjusted and adjusted predictors of the primary endpoint within those initially treated with NIV were investigated.Results1933 patients who were included in the registry during the study period had data on oxygen support type. Among them, 390 patients (20%) were treated with NIV. Compared with those receiving other non-invasive oxygen strategy, patients receiving NIV showed significantly worse clinical and laboratory signs of ARF at presentation. Of the 390 patients treated with NIV, 173 patients (44.4%) met the composite endpoint. In-hospital death was the main determinant (147, 37.7%), while 62 patients (15.9%) needed invasive ventilation. Those requiring invasive ventilation had the lowest survival rate (41.9%). After adjustment, age (adjusted OR (adj(OR)) for 5-year increase: 1.37, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.63, p<0.001), hypertension (adj(OR) 2.95, 95% CI 1.14 to 7.61, p=0.03), room air O2 saturation <92% at presentation (adj(OR) 3.05, 95% CI 1.28 to 7.28, p=0.01), lymphocytopenia (adj(OR) 3.55, 95% CI 1.16 to 10.85, p=0.03) and in-hospital use of antibiotic therapy (adj(OR) 4.91, 95% CI 1.69 to 14.26, p=0.003) were independently associated with the composite endpoint.ConclusionNIV was used in a significant proportion of patients within our cohort, and more than half of these patients survived without the need for intubation. NIV may represent a viable strategy particularly in case of overcrowded and limited intensive care resources, but prompt identification of failure is mandatory to avoid harm. Further studies are required to better clarify our hypothesis.Trial registration numbersNCT04334291/EUPAS34399.

scholarly journals High-flow oxygen therapy versus non-invasive ventilation: a randomised physiological cross-over study of alveolar recruitment in acute respiratory failure

2021 ◽  
pp. 00373-2021
Author(s):  
Elise Artaud-Macari ◽  
Michael Bubenheim ◽  
Gurvan Le Bouar ◽  
Dorothée Carpentier ◽  
Steven Grangé ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Respiratory Failure ◽  
Acute Respiratory Failure ◽  
Oxygen Therapy ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Alveolar Recruitment ◽  
Patient Comfort ◽  
Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Lung Volumes ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Non Invasive Ventilation

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy has recently shown clinical benefits in hypoxemic acute respiratory failure (ARF) patients, while the interest of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) remains debated. The primary endpoint was to compare alveolar recruitment using global end-expiratory electrical lung impedance (EELI) between HFNC and NIV. Secondary endpoints compared regional EELI, lung volumes (global and regional tidal volume variation (TV)), respiratory parameters, hemodynamic tolerance, dyspnea and patient comfort between HFNC and NIV, relative to face mask (FM).A prospective randomised cross-over physiological study was conducted in patients with hypoxemic ARF due to pneumonia. They received alternately HFNC, NIV and FM.Sixteen patients were included. Global EELI was 4083 with NIV and 2921 with HFNC (p=0.4). Compared to FM, NIV and HFNC significantly increased global EELI by 1810.5 (95%CI: (857; 2646)) and 826 (95%CI: (399.5; 2361)) respectively. Global and regional TV increased significantly with NIV compared to HFNC or FM, but not between HFNC and FM. NIV yielded a significantly higher SpO2/ FiO2 ratio compared to HFNC (p=0.03). No significant difference was observed between HFNC, NIV and FM for dyspnea. Patient comfort score with FM was not significantly different than with HFNC (p=0.1) but was lower with NIV (p=0.001).This study suggests a potential benefit of HFNC and NIV on alveolar recruitment in patients with hypoxemic ARF. In contrast with HFNC, NIV increased lung volumes which may contribute to overdistension and its potentially deleterious effect in these patients.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document