Conventional Oxygen Therapy Group Research Articles

Efficacy of high-flow nasal oxygen therapy in cancer patients with concurrent acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a retrospective propensity score study.

Acute respiratory failure is the leading cause of intensive care unit (ICU) admission of cancer patients. Studies of the efficacy of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy were rarely conducted in cancer populations. We here compared the clinical effects of HFNC therapy and conventional oxygen therapy (COT) in cancer patients with concurrent acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF). In this single-center retrospective study, cancer patients with concurrent acute hypoxic respiratory failure either received initial oxygen therapy via HFNC (HFNC group, 68 patients) or received initial oxygen therapy via a nasal cannula, simple mask, or mask with reservoir bag (COT group, 133 patients). Groups were propensity score matched. Differences in respiratory rate (RR), heart rate (HR), and PaO2/FiO2 ratio before and after treatment in the two groups were compared using a mixed-effects model. The 28-day mortality risk was explored using a Cox proportional hazards model. The 24-h and 48-h PaO2/FIO2 ratios were significantly higher in the HFNC than in the COT group (210.5mmHg vs. 178.5mmHg; P < 0.01; 217.1mm Hg vs. 181.6mm Hg; P < 0.01, respectively). Differences in RR and HR between the groups at each time point were nonsignificant. The 28-day mortality rate was 17.4% vs. 38.1% for the HFNC and COT groups, respectively (P < 0.01). Hazard ratio was significantly higher for COT group (HR 2.6, 95% confidence interval 1.3, 5.3). Compared with COT, HFNC use for initial oxygen therapy can improve PaO2/FIO2 ratio and survival rate in cancer patients with AHRF.

High Flow Nasal Cannula Versus Conventional Oxygen Therapy and Incidence of Post-Extubation Airway Obstruction in PICU: An Open-Label Randomized Controlled Trial (HiFloCOT-PICU Trial).

To study the impact of high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) vs. conventional oxygen therapy (COT) (by simple nasal cannula) as respiratory support after extubation on the rates of post-extubation airway obstruction (PEAO) among mechanically ventilated critically ill children. This open-label randomized controlled trial was conducted in pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) of a tertiary care teaching hospital in North India over a period of 7 mo (11 August 2021 to 10 March 2022). Children aged 3 mo to 12 y who required invasive mechanical ventilation for > 72h and had passed spontaneous breathing trial (ready for extubation) were enrolled and randomized by computer generated block randomization to receive HFNC or COT after extubation. Primary outcome was rate of PEAO (assessed by modified Westley croup score, mWCS) within 48h of extubation; and secondary outcomes were rate and number of adrenaline nebulization, treatment failure (requiring escalation of respiratory support), extubation failure, adverse events, and length of PICU stay in two groups. During the study period, 116 children were enrolled (58 each in HFNC and COT groups). There was no difference in rate of PEAO (55% vs. 51.7%, respectively), need of adrenaline nebulization, extubation failure, adverse events, and duration of PICU stay in two groups. However, the HFNC group had significantly lower rates of treatment failure (27.6% vs. 48.3%, p = 0.02). The rate of PEAO was similar in HFNC and COT groups. However, HFNC group had significantly lower rate of treatment failure requiring escalation of respiratory support.

Use of a gas-operated ventilator as a noninvasive bridging respiratory therapy in critically Ill COVID-19 patients in a middle-income country.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a notable undersupply of respiratory support devices, especially in low- and middle-income countries. As a result, many hospitals turned to alternative respiratory therapies, including the use of gas-operated ventilators (GOV). The aim of this study was to describe the use of GOV as a noninvasive bridging respiratory therapy in critically ill COVID-19 patients and to compare clinical outcomes achieved with this device to conventional respiratory therapies. Retrospective cohort analysis of critically ill COVID-19 patients during the first local wave of the pandemic. The final analysis included 204 patients grouped according to the type of respiratory therapy received in the first 24h, as follows: conventional oxygen therapy (COT), n = 28 (14%); GOV, n = 72 (35%); noninvasive ventilation (NIV), n = 49 (24%); invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), n = 55 (27%). In 72, GOV served as noninvasive bridging respiratory therapy in 42 (58%) of these patients. In the other 30 patients (42%), 20 (28%) presented clinical improvement and were discharged; 10 (14%) died. In the COT and GOV groups, 68% and 39%, respectively, progressed to intubation (P ≤ 0.001). Clinical outcomes in the GOV and NIV groups were similar (no statistically significant differences). GOV was successfully used as a noninvasive bridging respiratory therapy in more than half of patients. Clinical outcomes in the GOV group were comparable to those of the NIV group. These findings support the use of GOV as an emergency, noninvasive bridging respiratory therapy in medical crises when alternative approaches to the standard of care may be justifiable.

A meta-analysis of the effects of transnasal high-flow oxygen therapy in gastrointestinal endoscopy.

This study aimed to systematically evaluate the clinical effects of using transnasal high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and conventional oxygen therapy (COT) in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy. A comprehensive literature search was conducted from 2004 to April 2024 to collect relevant studies on the application of HFNC in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy. Multiple Chinese and English databases, including China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data, Web of Science, PubMed, and Cochrane Library, were searched systematically for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. RevMan 5.4 software was utilized for conducting the network meta-analysis. A total of 12 RCTs involving 3,726 patients were included. Meta-analysis results showed that HFNC reduced the incidence of hypoxemia and improved the minimum oxygen saturation (SpO2) compared with COT [odds ratio (OR) = 0.39, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.29-0.53], [mean difference (MD) = 4.07, 95% CI: 3.14-5.01], and the difference was statistically significant. However, the baseline SpO2 levels and incidence of hypercapnia were not statistically significantly different between the HFNC and COT groups [MD = -0.21, 95% CI: -0.49-0.07]; [OR = 1.43, 95% CI: 0.95-2.15]. In terms of procedure time, the difference between HFNC and COT was not statistically significant, and subgroup analyses were performed for the different types of studies, with standard deviation in the gastroscopy group (MD = 0.09, 95% CI: -0.07-0.24) and the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography group (MD = 0.36, 95% CI: -0.50-1.23). The results demonstrated a significant reduction in the adoption of airway interventions in the HFNC group compared to the COT group (OR = 0.16, 95% CI: 0.05-0.53), with a statistically significant difference; this result was consistent with those of the included studies. The application of HFNC improves the incidence of hypoxemia, enhances oxygenation, and reduces airway interventions during gastrointestinal endoscopy. However, HFNC does not significantly affect baseline SpO2, hypercapnia, or procedure time. The limitations of this study must be acknowledged, and further high-quality studies should be conducted to validate these findings.

Comparison of high-flow nasal cannula and conventional oxygen therapy in treating COVID-19 patients referred to the emergency department: A randomized, single-blind clinical trial

Objective: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy has been recently implicated in the treatment of patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF). This study investigated the effect of this treatment on COVID-19 patients. Methods: This was a prospective, randomized, single-blind clinical trial performed between June and November 2021 (Delta variant of the coronavirus) at Al-Zahra Hospital in Iran, on patients with COVID-19 referred to the emergency department (ED). COVID-19 patients who had peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2)≤90% despite receiving nasal oxygen (up to 6 L/min) were included in the study and randomly assigned to receive either HFNC or conventional oxygen therapy (COT) treatment. The patients were compared regarding vital signs, SpO2, and the need for endotracheal intubation and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. The calculated sample size was 35 patients in each group. The variables were compared using the chi-square, student’s t-test, or Mann-Whitney U tests. The data was analyzed using SPSS version 25. Results: Eighty-seven patients with a mean age of 65.3±14.8 (62.1% male) were included. The two groups were similar in terms of age, sex, time interval from onset to diagnosis, and underlying diseases (hypertension, diabetes, coronary artery disease, etc.) (P&lt;0.05). No statistically significant difference was reported between SpO2 and PaO2/FiO2 vital signs at the beginning of treatment between the two groups. One hour after treatment, respiratory rate, SpO2, and PaO2/ FiO2 were better in the HFNC group compared to the COT group (P&lt;0.05). Also, there was no significant difference between the two groups regarding in-hospital mortality or the need for endotracheal intubation or ICU admission. Conclusion: Early use of HFNC oxygen therapy in patients with COVID-19 can improve SpO2, respiratory rate, and PaO2/FiO2 levels, making it highly valuable from a clinical point of view.

High flow oxygen therapy versus conventional oxygen therapy in dogs and cats undergoing bronchoscopy and bronchoalveolar lavage: a pilot study

ObjectivesTo evaluate the safety and feasibility of high flow oxygen therapy (HFOT), and to record SpO2 and desaturation episodes in dogs and cats receiving HFOT or conventional oxygen therapy (COT) during bronchoscopy ± bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL).Materials and methodsDogs and cats undergoing bronchoscopy ± BAL between January and May 2023 were included in the study. Patients were randomly allocated to two groups: HFOT (HFOT group; two cats and four dogs) and COT (COT group; one cat and five dogs). HFOT and COT were started at the beginning of the bronchoscopy. HFOT was delivered with a gas flow rate of 1 L/kg/min at an FiO2 of 100% and a temperature of 34°C (pediatric mode) or 37°C (adult mode). COT was delivered through the working channel of the bronchoscope at a rate of 1.5 L/min. The safety and feasibility of HFOT were assessed, and peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) was measured by pulse oximetry every 30 s throughout the procedure.Measurements and main resultsHFOT was feasible and safe in both dogs and cats with no complications reported. While there was no significant difference in the number of desaturation episodes (SpO2 &amp;lt; 94%) between the two groups, none of the patients in the HFOT group experienced severe desaturation (SpO2 &amp;lt; 90%). In contrast, two patients in the COT group had an SpO2 &amp;lt; 90%. Mean SpO2 was significantly higher in the HFOT group compared to the COT group at T0 (98% ± 2% vs. 94 ± 2%), T0.5 (98% ± 2% vs. 94% ± 3%) and T1 (98% ± 2% vs. 94% ± 4%).ConclusionTo the authors’ knowledge, this is the largest study conducted to date using HFOT during bronchoscopy in dogs and cats. Our results suggest that HFOT is feasible and safe during bronchoscopy ± BAL. Furthermore, HFOT may reduce the risk of desaturation episodes in dogs and cats undergoing bronchoscopy and BAL.

High-Flow Tracheal Oxygen for Tracheostomy Tube Removal in Lung Transplant Recipients.

(1) Background: Because of a complicated intraoperative course and/or poor recovery of graft function, approximately 15% of lung transplant (LT) recipients require prolonged mechanical ventilation (PMV) and receive a tracheostomy. This prospective study aimed to assess the effect of High-Flow Tracheal Oxygen (HFTO) on tracheostomy tube removal in LT recipients receiving PMV postoperatively. (2) Methods: The clinical course of 14 LT recipients receiving HFTO was prospectively evaluated and compared to that of 13 comparable controls receiving conventional oxygen therapy (COT) via tracheostomy. The study's primary endpoint was the number of patients whose tracheostomy tube was removed at discharge from an Intermediate Respiratory Care Unit (IRCU). (3) Results: Setting up HFTO proved easy, and it was well tolerated by all the patients. The number of patients whose tracheostomy tube was removed was significantly higher in the HFOT group compared to the COT group [13/14 vs. 6/13 (p = 0.0128)]. (4) Conclusions: HFTO is an effective, safe therapy that facilitates tracheostomy tube removal in LT recipients after weaning from PMV.

Efficacy of different respiratory supports to prevent hypoxia during flexible bronchoscopy in patients of COPD: a triple-arm, randomised controlled trial

BackgroundPatients with chronic-obstructive-pulmonary-disease (COPD) undergo bronchoscopy for various reasons, and are at relatively higher risk of complications. This study evaluated the efficacy of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and high-flow-oxygen-therapy (HFOT) compared...

Effects of Conservative Oxygen Therapy versus Conventional Oxygen Therapy on the Mortality in ICU Patients: A Meta-Analysis.

To compare the effects of conservative oxygen therapy and conventional oxygen therapy on the mortality of critically ill patients in ICU. Searching for randomized controlled clinical trials (RCT) on the effect of conservative oxygen therapy and conventional oxygen therapy on the mortality of critically ill patients in computer databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang, with postdate before August 2022. We have two researchers evaluating the quality of the literature included and extracting data as per the inclusion and exclusion criteria and then analyzed it with RevMan 5.4 statistical software. Primary outcome included short-term mortality (28-day mortality or ICU mortality); secondary outcome included 90-day mortality, ICU length of stay, hospital length of stay, incidence of new organ dysfunction in ICU, incidence of new infection in ICU, and incidence of ICUAW. A total of 5779 subjects were included in 10 articles, including 2886 in the conservative oxygen therapy group and 2893 in the conventional oxygen therapy group. The meta-analysis showed that conservative oxygen therapy had an advantage over conventional oxygen therapy in terms of short-term mortality (P=0.03). Subgroup analysis based on different conservative oxygen targets showed that this advantage was statistically significant when the target is set above 90% (RR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.62∼0.94, P=0.01), while there was no significant difference between conservative oxygen therapy and conventional oxygen therapy when the target is set below 90% (RR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.79∼1.16, P=0.63). In addition, in terms of the incidence of new infections in the ICU (P=0.03) and the incidence of ICUAW (P=0.03), conservative oxygen therapy also had advantages over conventional oxygen therapy, and the difference was statistically significant. But in terms of 90-day mortality (P=0.61), ICU length of stay (P=0.96), hospital length of stay (P=0.47), and incidence of new organ dysfunction in ICU (P=0.61), there was no significant difference between conservative oxygen therapy and conventional oxygen therapy. Compared with conventional oxygen therapy, conservative oxygen therapy can reduce the short-term mortality of severe patients, especially when the conservative oxygen therapy target is set above 90%. And it can also reduce the incidence of ICU new infections and ICUAW, while having no effect on 90-day mortality, ICU length of stay, and hospital length of stay.

Cost Analysis of High-Flow Oxygen Therapy Compared with Conventional Oxygen Therapy in Severe COVID-19 in Colombia: Data from a Randomized Clinical Trial.

A randomized clinical trial (HiFlo-COVID-19 Trial) showed that among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with high-flow oxygen therapy (HFOT) significantly reduced the need for invasive mechanical ventilation support and time for clinical recovery compared with conventional oxygen therapy (COT). However, the cost of this strategy is unknown. We examined total cost of HFOT treatment compared with COT in real-world setting. We conducted a post-trial-based cost analysis from the perspective of a managed competition healthcare system, using actual records of billed costs. Cost categories include general ward, intensive care unit, procedures, imaging, laboratories, medications, supplies, and others. A total of 188 participants (mean age 60, 33% female) were included. Average costs (and standard deviation) in the HFOT group were USD $7992 (7394) and in the COT group USD $ 10,190 (9402). Differences, however, did not reach statistical significance (P=0.093). However, resource use was always less costly for the HNFO group, with an overall percentage decrease of 27%. Two categories make up 72% of all savings: medications (41%) and intensive care unit (31%). For patients in ICU with severe COVID-19 the cost of treatment with HFOT as compared to COT is likely to be cost-saving due to less use of medications and length of stay in ICU.

Effects of High-Flow Nasal Cannula on Right Heart Dysfunction in Patients with Acute-on-Chronic Respiratory Failure and Pulmonary Hypertension.

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has several benefits in patients affected by different forms of acute respiratory failure, based on its own mechanisms. We postulated that HFNC may have some advantages over conventional oxygen therapy (COT) on the heart function in patients with acute-on-chronic respiratory failure with concomitant pulmonary hypertension (PH). We therefore designed this retrospective observational study to assess if HFNC improves the right and left ventricle functions and morphologies, arterial blood gases (ABGs), and patients' dyspnea, compared to COT. We enrolled 17 hospitalized patients receiving HFNC, matched with 17 patients receiving COT. Echocardiographic evaluation was performed at the time of admission (baseline) and 10 days after (T10). HFNC showed significant improvements in right ventricular morphology and function, and a reduction in sPAP. However, there were no significant changes in the left heart measurements with HFNC application. Conversely, COT did not lead to any modifications in echocardiographic measurements. In both groups, oxygenation significantly improved from baseline to T10 (in the HFNC group, from 155 ± 47 to 204 ± 61 mmHg while in the COT group, from 157 ± 27 to 207 ± 27 mmHg; p < 0.0001 for both comparisons). In conclusion, these data suggest an improvement of oxygenation with both treatments; however, only HFNC was able to improve the right ventricular morphology and function after 10 days from the beginning of treatment in a small cohort of patients with acute-on-chronic respiratory failure with PH.

Effect of post-extubation high-flow nasal cannula combined with respiratory training versus conventional oxygen therapy on postoperative pulmonary complications in patients after major abdominal surgery: protocol for a single-centre randomized controlled trial

BackgroundNearly 234 million patients undergo surgery each year, and 1.3 million among them develop complications. Patients undergoing major upper abdominal surgery (operation time > 2 h) have a really high incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs). The occurrence of PPCs seriously affects the outcomes of patients. High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is as effective as noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in preventing postoperative hypoxaemia and respiratory failure. Respiratory training using positive expiratory pressure (PEP) Acapella (Choice) has been shown to help patients with rapid recovery from postoperative atelectasis. However, no relevant randomized controlled studies have been conducted to clarify the effect of HFNC combined with respiratory training in the prevention of PPCs. This study aims to investigate whether the use of HFNC combined with respiratory training could reduce the incidence of PPCs within 7 days after major upper abdominal surgery compared to that with conventional oxygen therapy (COT).MethodsThis is a randomized controlled single-centre trial. A total of 328 patients who undergo major abdominal surgery will be included. Subjects who fulfil the eligible criteria will be randomly assigned into the combination treatment group (Group A) or COT group (Group B) after extubation. The interventions will begin within 30 min of extubation. Patients in Group A will receive HFNC for at least 48 h and respiratory training three times a day for at least 72 h. Patients in Group B will receive oxygen therapy through a nasal catheter or mask for at least 48 h. Our primary endpoint is the incidence of PPCs within 7 days, and the secondary outcome measures include 28-day mortality, reintubation rate, length of hospital stay, and all-cause mortality within 1 year.DiscussionThis trial would help provide evidence on the effectivity of applying HFNC combined with respiratory training for the prevention of PPCs in patients undergoing major upper abdominal surgery. The objective of this study is to determine the optimal treatment approach to improve the prognosis of patients undergoing surgery.Trial registrationChiCTR2100047146. Registered on 8 June 2021. Retrospectively registered.

Comparison of High-Flow Nasal Cannula Versus Conventional Oxygen Therapy After Extubation in Children Undergoing Cardiac Surgery: A Meta-analysis.

This meta-analysis aims to compare high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and conventional oxygen therapy (COT) post-extubation in pediatric cardiac surgical patients.The present meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)guidelines. Two authors independently searched three electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify relevant articles published in English from inception to February 2023. Searching was conducted using keywords and medical subject headings (MeSH), which included "conventional oxygen therapy," "high-flow nasal cannula," "extubation," "pediatrics," and "cardiac surgery." Our primary outcome was extubation failure defined as the need for reintubation within 24 to 72 hours after planned extubation. Secondary outcomes assessed in this meta-analysis included partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO2), partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide (PaCO2), and the ratio of PaO2 and FiO2 (fraction of inspired oxygen). A total of three studies were included in the meta-analysis, with a total of 227 patients. No significant difference was found between the two groups (the HFNC group and the COT group) in terms of reintubation (RR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.34, 2.30, p-value: 0.80).Pooled meta-analysis showed that PaO2 was significantly greater in patients receiving HFNC at six hours (MD: 33.73, 95% CI: 18.33, 49.14, p-value<0.001), at 12 hours (MD: 44.90, 95% CI: 28.59, 61.22, p-value<0.001) and at 24 hours (MD: 43.53, 95% CI: 29.16, 57.91, p-value<0.001) of extubation. PaCO2 was significantly lower in patients receiving HFNC at six hours (MD: -5.40, 95% CI: -7.94, -2.85, p-value<0.001) and at 12 hours (MD: -5.93, 95% CI: -9.78, -2.09, p-value<0.001) of extubation. However, no significant difference was reported between the two groups after 24 hours of extubation (MD: -0.84, 95% CI: -9.04, 7.37, p-value: 0.84) andPaO2/FiO2 was significantly greater in patients receiving HFNC at six hours (MD: 64.14, 95% CI: 36.10, 92.17, p-value<0.001), at 12 hours (MD: 70.73, 95% CI: 20.46, 121.01, p-value<0.001) and at 24 hours (MD: 82.18, 95% CI: 50.03, 114.32, p-value<0.001) of intubation. In conclusion, the meta-analysis revealed that compared with COT, HFNC significantly increased PaO2and the ratio of PaO2 to FiO2, and decreased PaCO2. No significant differences were observed in the rate of reintubation between the two groups. This is the first meta-analysis comparing HFNC and COT in pediatric cardiac surgical patients.

The use of high-flow versus conventional oxygen therapy in addition to noninvasive ventilation in exacerbated COPD patients in the ICU: A retrospective cohort study in 351 patients

Background and aimThe optimal treatment strategy for acute exacerbation of COPD in the ICU next to the well-known benefits of noninvasive ventilation (NIPPV) is unknown. We hypothesised that High Flow Nasal Cannula (HFNC) as noninvasive respiratory support plus NIPPV could add additional help compared to conventional oxygen therapy (COT) plus NIPPV. MethodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis. We included 351 patients admitted to ICU with AECOPD and need for NIPPV. Survival was assessed with Kaplan-Meier curves and the Log-rank test. Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to analyse differences in survival between treatment groups. Results126 patients were treated with HFNC plus NIPPV. 225 patients received COT plus NIPPV. Median pH and hypercapnia only showed slight differences on admission. ICU stay was 4 days in both groups. The need for invasive ventilation was alike in both groups (HFNC 18.3% vs COT 17.8%). In a cox regression model for 30-day mortality, patients treated with HFNC showed a 2.17 (0.99–4.78) higher hazard for mortality compared to the COT group (p = 0.054). ConclusionAccording to our data HFNC in combination with noninvasive positive pressure ventilation does not seem to provide additional benefits over COT in combination with noninvasive positive pressure ventilation in terms of 30-day mortality and need for intubation.

Comparison of high-flow nasal cannula and conventional oxygen therapy for high-risk patients during bronchoscopy examination: protocol for a randomized controlled trial

IntroductionHigh-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has been proven to improve oxygenation and avoid intubation in hypoxemic patients. It has also been utilized during endoscopy examination to reduce the incidence of hypoxia. However, little is known about the effects of HFNC versus conventional oxygen therapy (COT) on oxygenation during bronchoscopy examination via nasal route; particularly, no study has compared the use of HFNC with that of COT at similar FIO2 for patients who have high-risk factors of desaturation during bronchoscopy examination.Methods and analysisThis randomized controlled trial will be implemented in four academic centers in China. Patients who have high-risk factors including hypoxemia, hypercapnia, morbid obesity, and narrow airway will be enrolled to use HFNC or COT during bronchoscopy examination. In the HFNC group, the initial gas flow will be set at 50 L/min with a fraction of inspired oxygen (FIO2) at 0.45, if the patient tolerates, the flow can be increased to 60L/min at most, while in the COT group, oxygen flow will be set at 6 L/min via a conventional nasal cannula. After 5 min pre-oxygenation, the bronchoscope will be inserted via the nasal route. Vital signs, oxygenation (SpO2), and transcutaneous CO2 (PtCO2) will be continuously monitored. The primary outcome is the incidence of hypoxemia, defined as SpO2 < 90% for 10 s during bronchoscopy examination, and secondary outcomes include the need for treatment escalation and adverse events.DiscussionHypoxia is a common complication of bronchoscopy, our study attempted to demonstrate that HFNC may reduce the probability of hypoxia during bronchoscopy in high-risk patients. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and national and international conferences.Trial registrationhttp://www.chictr.org.cn/: ChiCTR2100055038. Registered on 31 December 2021.

Tocilizumab Therapy in Critically Ill Patients with Coronavirus Disease-2019 Pneumonia. A Propensity Score-adjusted Analysis

BACKGROUND: Extubation failure of patients on mechanical ventilation is relatively a frequent finding in the intensive care unit (ICU) and associated with poor prognosis. AIM: We conducted this study in Critical Care Department, Cairo University hospitals in which we aimed to assess if there is advantage to use high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) or non-invasive ventilation (NIV) over conventional oxygen therapy (COT) in success of extubation of patients. METHODS: The study included 60 patients and was randomized into three equal groups. The first group used HFNC, the second group used COT, while the third group used NIV. The reintubation rate, ICU stay, ICU mortality, and 28-day mortality were followed in all groups. RESULTS: The all study population had a mean age of 62 ± 21, 31 patients were male, and 21 patients were smokers. SOFA score on admission, APACHE II, and SOFA pre-extubation was not significantly different in the three groups. Reintubation rate was higher in COT group compared to HFNC or NIV groups (p &lt; 0.05). ICU stay was longer in COT compared to the other two groups, while ICU and 28-day mortality showed no significant difference among the all groups. CONCLUSION: Use of HFNC and NIV was associated with lower reintubation rate, improved oxygenation and shorter ICU stay but no significant effect on mortality in comparison with COT.

High flow nasal cannula for patients undergoing bronchoscopy and gastrointestinal endoscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BackgroundHigh flow nasal cannula is gaining increasingly used in patients undergoing endoscopic procedures. We undertook this systematic review and meta-analysis to determine whether high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) could effectively minimize the risk of hypoxemia as compared with conventional oxygen therapy (COT).MethodsWe performed a comprehensive search of Pubmed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, and Web of Science. Studies involving the application of HFNC during endoscopic procedures were identified.ResultsWe included 15 randomized controlled trials (7 bronchoscopy, 8 gastrointestinal endoscopy). Patients receiving HFNC during endoscopic procedures had a significantly lower risk of hypoxemia (defined as SpO2 < 90%) versus COT group (risk ratio = 0.32; 95%CI (0.22–0.47), 13 studies, 4,093 patients, moderate-quality evidence, I2 = 48.82%, P < 0.001). The lowest SpO2 was significantly higher in HFNC group (mean difference = 4.41; 95%CI (2.95–5.86), 9 studies, 1,449 patients, moderate-quality evidence, I2 = 81.17%, P < 0.001) than those receiving COT. No significant difference was detected between groups in end-procedure partial pressure of CO2 (standard mean difference = −0.18; 95%CI (−0.52–0.15), 5 studies, 238 patients, moderate-quality evidence, I2 = 42.25%, P = 0.29). Patients receiving HFNC were associated a lower need for airway intervention (risk ratio = 0.45; 95%CI (0.24–0.84), 8 studies, 2,872 patients, moderate-quality evidence, I2 = 85.97%, P = 0.01) and less procedure interruption (risk ratio = 0.36; 95%CI (0.26–0.51), 6 studies, 1,562 patients, moderate-quality evidence, I2 = 0.00%, P < 0.001). The overall intubation rate after endoscopy was 0.20% in both group, with no difference detected (risk ratio = 1.00; 95%CI (0.30–3.35), 7 studies, 2,943 patients, low-quality evidence, I2 = 0.00%, P = 1.00).ConclusionThis systematic review and meta-analysis found moderate to low evidence that the application of HFNC was associated with improved oxygenation, decreased need for airway intervention, and reduced procedure interruption in patients undergoing endoscopic procedures. Future larger sample and high-quality studies are warranted to confirm our result and further investigate the effectiveness of HFNC in patients at risk. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42022298032.

Comparison of Conventional Oxygen Therapy With High-Flow Nasal Oxygenation in the Management of Hypercapnic Respiratory Failure.

Introduction: The effectiveness of high-flow nasal oxygenation (HFNO) in patients with hypercapnic respiratory failure (RF) remains controversial. The current study compared the effectiveness of HFNO in patients with hypercapnic RF with conventional oxygen therapy (COT).Objectives: The primary objective was to compare changes in the partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2) between those receiving COT and HFNO. The secondary objectives were to compare changes in the partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), oxygen saturation (SpO2), respiratory rate (RR), serum bicarbonate level, base excess, lactate level, and incidence of the need for non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and mechanical ventilation (MV).Methods: We recruited 30 patients with mild to moderate hypercapnic RF in the HFNO group, and data of 30 patients from historical controls, who matched the inclusion criteria, were obtained from medical records for comparison (COT group). The study was terminated after two hours, and patients were managed per the existing protocol after that. Arterial blood gas (ABG) analysis was repeated at the baseline, first, second, and third hours.Results: In the COT group, the mean RR at the baseline, first, second, and third hours was 24.5 ± 2.61, 24.9 ± 3.03, 26.03 ± 3.4, and 22.90 ± 1.86, whereas, in the HFNO group, it was 25.93 ± 3.91, 23.00 ± 3.54, 22.50 ± 3.38, and 21.90 ± 3.57, respectively. The mean PaCO2 in the COT vs. HFNO groups was 54.45 ± 5.83 vs. 62.22 ± 9.15, 57.74 ± 6.05 vs. 58.65 ± 10.43, 60.79 ± 7.48 vs. 60.41 ± 11.24, and 55.23 ± 6.63 vs. 56.95 ± 10.31. The mean SpO2 in the COT group at these points of time was 94.50 ± 1.46, 95.4 ± 1.28, 96.10 ± 1.84, and 97.53 ± 2.05, whereas, in the HFNO group, it was 95.40 ± 2.55, 98.63 ± 1.43, 99.00 ± 1.66, and 99.50 ± 1.31, respectively. The patients who needed NIV after the study period were 50% and 36.67% in the COT and HFNO groups, respectively.Conclusions: There was no change in PaCO2 levels with HFNO, but there was a significant improvement in SpO2 and PaO2 levels and a decreased RR. Following the termination of the study protocol, more patients in the COT group needed NIV than those in the HFNO group.

High-flow nasal cannula versus conventional oxygen therapy in acute COPD exacerbation with mild hypercapnia: a multicenter randomized controlled trial

BackgroundHigh-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) can improve ventilatory function in patients with acute COPD exacerbation. However, its effect on clinical outcomes remains uncertain.MethodsThis randomized controlled trial was conducted from July 2017 to December 2020 in 16 tertiary hospitals in China. Patients with acute COPD exacerbation with mild hypercapnia (pH ≥ 7.35 and arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide > 45 mmHg) were randomly assigned to either HFNC or conventional oxygen therapy. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who met the criteria for intubation during hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included treatment failure (intolerance and need for non-invasive or invasive ventilation), length of hospital stay, hospital cost, mortality, and readmission at day 90.ResultsAmong 337 randomized patients (median age, 70.0 years; 280 men [83.1%]; median pH 7.399; arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide 51 mmHg), 330 completed the trial. 4/158 patients on HFNC and 1/172 patient on conventional oxygen therapy met the criteria for intubation (P = 0.198). Patients progressed to NPPV in both groups were comparable (15 [9.5%] in the HFNC group vs. 22 [12.8%] in the conventional oxygen therapy group; P = 0.343). Compared with conventional oxygen therapy, HFNC yielded a significantly longer median length of hospital stay (9.0 [interquartile range, 7.0–13.0] vs. 8.0 [interquartile range, 7.0–11.0] days) and a higher median hospital cost (approximately $2298 [interquartile range, $1613–$3782] vs. $2005 [interquartile range, $1439–$2968]). There were no significant differences in other secondary outcomes between groups.ConclusionsIn this multi-center randomized controlled study, HFNC compared to conventional oxygen therapy did not reduce need for intubation among acute COPD exacerbation patients with mild hypercapnia. The future studies should focus on patients with acute COPD exacerbation with respiratory acidosis (pH < 7.35). However, because the primary outcome rate was well below expected, the study was underpowered to show a meaningful difference between the two treatment groups.Trial registration: NCT03003559. Registered on December 28, 2016.

How to treat patients with acute respiratory failure? Conventional oxygen therapy versus high‐flow nasal cannula in the emergency department

Objective:To investigate whether high‐flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy could reduce the rate of endotracheal intubation and improve arterial blood gas values, vital signs, and clinical outcomes of patients with hypoxemic acute respiratory failure as compared with conventional oxygen therapy alone.Methods:This retrospective, observational study was performed in the 15‐month study period and included adult patients with tachypnea and hypoxemia, whose vital signs and arterial blood gas were monitored. The high‐flow nasal cannula oxygen group consisted of patients admitted to the emergency department with acute respiratory failure when high‐flow nasal cannula oxygen treatment was available in the hospital, while the conventional oxygen therapy group consisted of patients who have presented to the emergency department with acute respiratory failure in the absence of high‐flow nasal cannula oxygen device in the hospital. The primary outcome of the study was improvement in vital signs and arterial blood gas values within first and fourth hours of the treatment. The second outcome was the need for intubation in the emergency department, length of hospital stay, and hospital mortality.Results:The decrease in the pulse and respiratory rate of high‐flow nasal cannula oxygen–treated group was significantly greater than the conventional oxygen therapy group on the first and fourth hours of treatment (p &lt; 0.001). PaO2 values were significantly higher in the high‐flow nasal cannula oxygen group at the first and fourth hours of treatment (p ⩽ 0.001). Likewise, mean SaO2 levels of patients receiving high‐flow nasal cannula oxygen treatment was significantly higher than those of patients in the conventional oxygen therapy group (p = 0.006 at 1 h and p &lt; 0.001 at 4 h). In the hypercapnic patients, the decrease in PaCO2 and increase in pH and PaO2 values were significantly greater in high‐flow nasal cannula oxygen group (p &lt; 0.001). The difference between the groups regarding the need for invasive mechanical ventilation was not statistically significant (p = 0.179).Conclusion:High‐flow nasal cannula oxygen treatment has been associated with favorable effects in vital signs and arterial blood gas values in patients with acute respiratory failure. High‐flow nasal cannula oxygen might be considered as the first‐line therapy for patients with hypoxemic and/or hypercapnic acute respiratory failure.