High-flow nasal cannulae for respiratory support in adult intensive care patients.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Corley A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6481761 | biostudies-literature | 2017 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
High-flow nasal cannulae for respiratory support in adult intensive care patients.
Corley Amanda A Rickard Claire M CM Aitken Leanne M LM Johnston Amy A Barnett Adrian A Fraser John F JF Lewis Sharon R SR Smith Andrew F AF
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews 20170530
<h4>Background</h4>High-flow nasal cannulae (HFNC) deliver high flows of blended humidified air and oxygen via wide-bore nasal cannulae and may be useful in providing respiratory support for adult patients experiencing acute respiratory failure in the intensive care unit (ICU).<h4>Objectives</h4>We evaluated studies that included participants 16 years of age and older who were admitted to the ICU and required treatment with HFNC. We assessed the safety and efficacy of HFNC compared with comparat ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8094160 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of high-flow oxygen via nasal cannulae (HFNC) compared to non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and/or standard oxygen in patients with acute, hypoxemic respiratory failure.MethodsWe reviewed randomized controlled trials from CENTRAL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Scopus and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (inception to February 2016), conference proceedings, and relevant article reference lists. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted trial-level data from trials investigating HFNC in patients with acute, hypoxemic respiratory failure. Internal validity was assessed in duplicate using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. The strength of evidence was assessed in duplicate using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. Our primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes included dyspnea, PaO2:FiO2 ratio, PaCO2, and pH. Safety outcomes included respiratory arrest, intubation, delirium, and skin breakdown.ResultsFrom 2023 screened citations, we identified seven trials (1771 patients) meeting inclusion criteria. All trials were at high risk of bias due to lack of blinding. There was no evidence for a mortality difference in patients receiving HFNC vs. NIV and/or standard oxygen (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.48, I 2 = 63%, five trials, 1629 patients). In subgroup analyses of HFNC compared to NIV or standard oxygen individually, mortality differences were not observed. Measures of patient tolerability were heterogeneous. The PaO2:FiO2 ratio at 6-12 h was significantly lower in patients receiving oxygen via HFNC compared to NIV or standard oxygen for hypoxemic respiratory failure (MD - 53.34, 95% CI - 71.95 to - 34.72, I 2 = 61%, 1143 patients). There were no differences in pH, PaCO2, or rates of intubation or cardio-respiratory arrest. Delirium and skin breakdown were infrequently reported in included trials.ConclusionsIn patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure HFNC was not associated with a difference in mortality compared to NIV or standard oxygen. Secondary outcomes including dyspnea, tolerance, and safety were not systematically reported. Residual heterogeneity and variable reporting of secondary outcomes limit the conclusions that can be made in this review. Prospective trials designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of HFNC in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure are required.
| S-EPMC5644261 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn obese patients, preoxygenation with non-invasive ventilation (NIV) was reported to improve outcomes compared with facemask. In this setting, high-flow nasal cannulae (HFNC) used before and during intubation has never been studied against NIV.MethodsThe PREOPTIPOP study is a randomised, single-centre, open-labelled, controlled trial including obese patients requiring intubation before scheduled surgery. Patients were randomised to receive preoxygenation by HFNC or NIV. HFNC was maintained throughout intubation whereas NIV was removed when apnea occurred to perform laryngoscopy. The study was designed to assess the superiority of HNFC. The primary outcome was the lowest level of end-tidal oxygen concentration (EtO2) within 2 min after intubation. Secondary outcomes included drop in pulse oximetry and complications related to intubation.Main findingsA total of 100 patients were randomised. The intent-to-treat analysis found median [IQR] lowest EtO2 of 76% [66-82] for HFNC and 88% [82-90] for NIV (mean difference - 12·1 [- 15·1 to - 8·5], p < 0·0001). Mild desaturation below 95% was more frequent with HFNC (30%) than with NIV (12%) (relative risk 2·5, IC 95% [1·1 to 5·9], p = 0·03) and median lowest SpO2 during intubation was 98% [93-99] in HFNC vs. 99% [97-100] in NIV (p = 0·03). Severe and moderate complications were not different but patients reported more discomfort with NIV (28%) vs. HFNC (4%), p = 0·001.InterpretationCompared with NIV, preoxygenation with HFNC in obese patients provided lower EtO2 after intubation and a higher rate of desaturation < 95%.FundingInstitutional funding, additional grant from Fisher & Paykel.Trial registrationClinical trial Submission: April 10, 2017. Registry name: Preoxygenation Optimization in Obese Patients: High-flow Nasal Cannulae Oxygen Versus Non-invasive Ventilation: A Single-centre Randomised Controlled Study. The PREOPTIPOP Study. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03106441 N°ID RCB: 2017-A00305-48. Institutional review Board: CPP Nord-Ouest I, registration number 019/2017. URL registry:https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03106441.
| S-EPMC6737343 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Despite the extensive use of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy in intensive care units (ICU) for acute respiratory failure (ARF), its daily clinical practice has not been assessed. We designed a regional survey in ICUs in North-west France to evaluate ICU physicians' clinical practice with HFNC. MATERIALS AND METHODS:We sent an observational survey to ICU physicians from 34 French ICUs over a 6-month period in 2016-2017. The survey included questions regarding the indications and expected efficiency of HFNC, practical aspects of use (initiation, weaning) and satisfaction. Comparisons between junior and senior ICU physicians were performed using a Fischer exact test. RESULTS:Among the 235 ICU physicians contacted, 137 responded (58.3%) all of whom regularly used HFNC. Hypoxemic ARF was considered a good indication for HFNC by all 137, but only 30% expected HFNC success (i.e., avoiding intubation in at least 60% of cases). Among hypoxemic indications, 30% of juniors considered acute pulmonary edema a good indication versus 74% of seniors (p < 0.0001). Hypercapnic ARF was considered a good indication by 33% with only 2% expecting HFNC success. A need for conventional oxygen therapy ≥ 6 L/min justified HFNC therapy for 40% and ≥ 9 L/min for 39% of responders. 58% of ICU physicians started HFNC therapy with a FiO2 ≥ 50% and 28% with a gas flow ≥ 50 L/min. Practices for HFNC weaning were heterogeneous: 48% considered a FiO2 ≤ 30%; whereas, 30% considered a FiO2 ≤ 30% with a high flow ≤ 20 L/min. Criteria for HFNC failure (i.e., need for intubation) were ventilatory pauses or arrest (97%), persistent hypoxemia (95%), respiratory acidosis (81%), worsening of breathing (95%, 100% of seniors and 86% of juniors, p = 0.003), bronchial congestion (75%) and circulatory failure (61%, 72% of seniors and 44% of juniors, p = 0.007). CONCLUSION:HFNC is used by ICU physicians in many situations of ARF, despite their relatively low expectations of success, especially in cases of hypercapnia. Clinical practices appear somewhat heterogeneous. Despite the physiological benefit of HFNC, further prospective observational studies are still required on HFNC outcomes and daily practices.
| S-EPMC6726730 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7292944 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the tolerability and efficacy of nasal pillow-noninvasive ventilation (NP-NIV) compared with high-flow nasal therapy (HFNT) in postsurgical patients.MethodsThis propensity score-matched retrospective study enrolled postoperative patients that received NP-NIV (NP-NIV group) or HFNT (HFNT group) in the intensive care unit. Data were collected from their medical records and the tolerability and respiratory status before and after extubation were compared between the two groups.ResultsThe study enrolled 83 patients in the NP-NIV group and 27 patients in the HFNT group. After propensity score matching, there were 19 patients in each group. After matching, there were no significant differences in the baseline demographic and clinical characteristics before extubation. The tolerability was similar in both groups. When the NP-NIV group was compared with the HFNT group, the respiratory rate was significantly lower (median 16 [interquartile range, 14-17] versus median 19 [interquartile range, 18-26], respectively) and the partial pressure of arterial oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen ratio was significantly higher (median 205 [174-256] versus median 155 [130-192], respectively) at 1 h after extubation.ConclusionNP-NIV was equally well tolerated and provided better respiratory support than HFNT in postsurgical patients.
| S-EPMC9310252 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDuring high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy, flow plays a crucial role in the physiological effects. However, there is no consensus on the initial flow settings and subsequent titration. Thus, we aimed to systematically synthesize the effects of flows during HFNC treatment.MethodsIn this systematic review, two investigators independently searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane for in vitro and in vivo studies investigating the effects of flows in HFNC treatment published in English before July 10, 2022. We excluded studies that investigated the pediatric population (< 18 years) or used only one flow. Two investigators independently extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias. The study protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO, CRD42022345419.ResultsIn total, 32,543 studies were identified, and 44 were included. In vitro studies evaluated the effects of flow settings on the fraction of inspired oxygen (FIO2), positive end-expiratory pressure, and carbon dioxide (CO2) washout. These effects are flow-dependent and are maximized when the flow exceeds the patient peak inspiratory flow, which varies between patients and disease conditions. In vivo studies report that higher flows result in improved oxygenation and dead space washout and can reduce work of breathing. Higher flows also lead to alveolar overdistention in non-dependent lung regions and patient discomfort. The impact of flows on different patients is largely heterogeneous.InterpretationIndividualizing flow settings during HFNC treatment is necessary, and titrating flow based on clinical findings like oxygenation, respiratory rates, ROX index, and patient comfort is a pragmatic way forward.
| S-EPMC9974062 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Many intensive care unit patients who undergo endotracheal extubation experience extubation failure and require reintubation. Because of the high mortality rate associated with reintubation, postextubation respiratory management is crucial, especially for high-risk populations. We conducted the present study to compare the effectiveness of oxygen therapy administered using high-flow nasal cannulae (HFNC) and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) in preventing reintubation among patients receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation (PMV). This single-center, prospective, unblinded randomized controlled trial was at the respiratory care center (RCC). Participants were randomized to an HFNC group or an NIPPV group (20 patients in each) and received noninvasive respiratory support (NRS) administered using their assigned method. The primary outcome was reintubation within7 days after extubation. None of the patients in the NIPPV group required reintubation, whereas 5 (25%) of the patients in the HFNC group required reintubation (P = 0.047). The 90-day mortality rates of the NIPPV and HFNC groups (four patients [20%] vs. two patients [10%], respectively) did not differ significantly. No significant differences in length of RCC stay, length of hospital stay, time to liberation from NRS, and ventilator-free days at 28-day were identified. The time to event outcome analysis also revealed that the risk of reintubation in the HFNC group was higher than that in the NIPPV group (P = 0.018). Although HFNC is becoming increasingly common as a form of postextubation NRS, HFNC may not be as effective as NIPPV in preventing reintubation among patients who have been receiving PMV for at least 2 weeks. Additional studies evaluating HFNC as an alternative to NIPPV for patients receiving PMV are warranted.ClinicalTrial.gov ID: NCT04564859; IRB number: 20160901R.Trial registration: ClinicalTrial.gov ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04564859 ).
| S-EPMC10033681 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn early 2022, there was a sudden surge of patients infected by the Omicron variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in Hong Kong (HK), resulting in 9,163 deaths as of 29 May 2022. Many of the local population had not been vaccinated before this wave. The number of patients who developed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related respiratory failure outnumbered the capacity of intensive care unit (ICU) beds. Some of these patients had to be supported with high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy outside ICU setting. HK was in crisis situation. The primary objective of this study is to assess the 28-day mortality of this group of patients. The secondary objective is to explore any predictors of non-survivors to help clinical decision-making in future crisis.MethodsThis is a retrospective observational study of patients suffering from COVID-19 related respiratory failure who received HFNC therapy in general medical wards of two hospitals during the period of 17 Mar to 30 Apr 2022. Survival and risk factors were reviewed.ResultsForty-nine patients were recruited. Twenty-six patients (53%) survived at 28-day after initiation of HFNC support. Three clinical parameters were found to be significantly associated with mortality at 28-day: (I) SpO2/FiO2 (SF) ratio <160 at 48 hours; (II) SF ratio <191 at 72 hours; (III) serial SF ratio at 48 or 72 hours showing no improvement over that at the time of initiation of HFNC therapy.ConclusionsUse of HFNC outside ICU setting showed benefit to patients suffering from COVID-19 related acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF). Serial SF ratio monitoring at 48 and 72 hours after therapy initiation might serve as predictors of outcome and thus guide clinical decision-making for medical resource allocation in outbreak situation.
| S-EPMC10407535 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimWe examined the impact of introducing high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (HFNT) on children under five with post-extubation respiratory failure in a paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) in Peru.MethodsThis quasi-experimental study compared clinical outcomes before and after initial HFNT deployment in the PICU at Instituto Nacional de Salud del Niño in Lima in June 2016. We compared three groups: 29 received post-extubation HFNT and 17 received continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) from 2016-17 and 12 historical controls received CPAP from 2012-16. The primary outcome was the need for mechanical ventilation. Adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated via survival analysis.ResultsHigh-flow nasal oxygen therapy and CPAP did not alter the need for mechanical ventilation after extubation (aHR 0.47, 95% CI 0.15-1.48 and 0.96, 95% CI 0.35-2.62, respectively) but did reduce the risk of reintubation (aHR 0.18, 95% CI 0.06-0.57 and 0.14, 95% CI 0.03-0.72, respectively). PICU length of stay was 11, 18 and 37 days for CPAP, HFNT and historical CPAP and mortality was 12%, 7% and 27%, respectively. There was no effect on the duration of sedative infusions.ConclusionHigh-flow nasal oxygen therapy provided effective support for some children, but larger studies in resource-constrained settings are needed.
| S-EPMC8294175 | biostudies-literature