Escalation Of Respiratory Support Research Articles

Impact of a Divided Phenobarbital Load and Taper Compared With Lorazepam Symptom Triggered Therapy in Hospitalized Patients.

Benzodiazepines are the preferred treatment for alcohol withdrawal. Phenobarbital is an alternative in the setting of prescriber expertise or benzodiazepine contraindication. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a phenobarbital dosing strategy aimed at treating a spectrum of alcohol withdrawal symptoms across various patient populations. Retrospective review of patients admitted with concerns of alcohol withdrawal between May 2018 and November 2022. Patients were separated into a before-after cohort of lorazepam or phenobarbital. The primary outcome was hospital length of stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes were intensive care unit (ICU) LOS, escalation of respiratory support, increased level of care (LOC), and incidence of delirium tremens and/or seizures. Two hundred and seventy-seven patients received lorazepam and 198 received phenobarbital. Hospital LOS was longer in the phenobarbital cohort compared with the lorazepam cohort (6.9 vs 9.3 days). There was no difference in ICU LOS. Level of care increases were fewer in the phenobarbital cohort (4 events vs 19 events). There were higher rates of non-invasive respiratory interventions in the lorazepam cohort and higher rates of mechanical ventilation in the phenobarbital cohort. Utilization of phenobarbital was attributed to a reduction in delirium tremens and seizures. This study is novel because of the broad application of a phenobarbital order set across multiple levels of care and patient admission diagnoses. A risk targeted split load intravenous phenobarbital order set can safely be administered to patients with fewer escalations of care, seizures, delirium tremens, and respiratory care escalation.

Barotrauma during Noninvasive Respiratory Support in COVID-19 Pneumonia Outside ICU: The Ancillary COVIMIX-2 Study.

Noninvasive respiratory support (NIRS) has been extensively used during the COVID-19 surge for patients with acute respiratory failure. However, little data are available about barotrauma during NIRS in patients treated outside the intensive care unit (ICU) setting. COVIMIX-2 was an ancillary analysis of the previous COVIMIX study, a large multicenter observational work investigating the frequencies of barotrauma (i.e., pneumothorax and pneumomediastinum) in adult patients with COVID-19 interstitial pneumonia. Only patients treated with NIRS outside the ICU were considered. Baseline characteristics, clinical and radiological disease severity, type of ventilatory support used, blood tests and mortality were recorded. In all, 179 patients were included, 60 of them with barotrauma. They were older and had lower BMI than controls (p < 0.001 and p = 0.045, respectively). Cases had higher respiratory rates and lower PaO2/FiO2 (p = 0.009 and p < 0.001). The frequency of barotrauma was 0.3% [0.1-1.3%], with older age being a risk factor for barotrauma (OR 1.06, p = 0.015). Alveolar-arterial gradient (A-a) DO2 was protective against barotrauma (OR 0.92 [0.87-0.99], p = 0.026). Barotrauma required active treatment, with drainage, in only a minority of cases. The type of NIRS was not explicitly related to the development of barotrauma. Still, an escalation of respiratory support from conventional oxygen therapy, high flow nasal cannula to noninvasive respiratory mask was predictive for in-hospital death (OR 15.51, p = 0.001). COVIMIX-2 showed a low frequency for barotrauma, around 0.3%. The type of NIRS used seems not to increase this risk. Patients with barotrauma were older, with more severe systemic disease, and showed increased mortality.

Comparison of high-flow nasal cannula with conventional oxygen therapy for preventing postoperative hypoxemia in patients with lung resection surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The efficacy of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) in patients extubated after lung resection surgery remains inconclusive. Our objective was to execute a meticulous systematic meta-analysis to accurately assess the advantages of HFNC compared to conventional oxygen therapy (COT) for patients extubated after lung resection surgery, by examining postoperative hypoxemia and other patient-focused outcomes. We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Scopus to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to July 2023. We employed the revised Cochrane risk of bias (RoB) tool (2.0) to evaluate the RoB of the included studies, and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) method to ascertain the certainty of the pooled effect estimates. The primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative hypoxemia. Five RCTs (n=564) were included in the ultimate analysis. Utilizing HFNC rather than COT did not reduce the risk of postoperative hypoxemia [relative risk (RR), 0.67; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.30-1.49; low certainty]. Compared to COT, HFNC may significantly enhance oxygenation index within first 12 hours after extubation in patients with lung resection. There were no significant differences in reintubation rate (RR, 0.25; 95% CI: 0.04-1.54; high certainty), escalation of respiratory support (RR, 0.35; 95% CI: 0.11-1.08; high certainty), change in partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2) within first 24 hours after extubation, hospital length of stay [mean difference (MD), -0.19; 95% CI: -0.44 to 0.06; moderate certainty], and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (MD, 0.02; 95% CI: -0.16 to 0.19; high certainty). Our meta-analysis suggests that preemptive use of HFNC, instead of COT, in extubated patients following lung resection surgery may not significantly impact postoperative hypoxemia incidence, reintubation rate, escalation of respiratory support, postoperative PaCO2 difference, hospital and ICU length of stay. However, HFNC may significantly enhance the oxygenation index within the first 12 hours post-extubation following lung resection surgery. To verify the effect of HFNC on this population, additional large-scale, multicenter studies are essential.

Healthcare-associated respiratory syncytial virus infections in children’s hospitals

Background: Little is known about the impact of healthcare-associated respiratory syncytial virus (HA-RSV) in hospitalized children. To address this gap, we assessed the epidemiology and clinical impact associated with HA-RSV in a multiseason, multicenter study. Methods: During respiratory viral seasons 2016–2017, 2017–2018, and 2018–2019, we retrospectively identified HA-RSV cases in hospitalized children 72 hours after admission or within 48 hours of discharge in readmitted patients. Due to reduced availability of testing for non–SARS-CoV-2 viruses during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, the 2019–2020 season was excluded. We initiated prospective HA-RSV surveillance during the 2020–2021 season and continued surveillance through November 2021 due to the unusual interseasonal RSV community outbreak. We determined demographic and clinical characteristics of HA-RSV cases and explored possible outcomes associated with RSV including transfer to the pediatric ICU and escalation of respiratory support from day −2 to day +4 (day 0 was the day of RSV detection). We explored the timeframe of day −2 to day +4 because events during this timeframe could be attributed to RSV infection. Respiratory support escalation was defined as change from room air to supplemental oxygen, increase in fraction of inspired oxzygen (FiO2) on same respiratory support modality, or change from noninvasive to invasive support. Results: Were identified 86 HA-RSV cases: 20 (23.3%) from 2016–2017, 26 (30.2%) from 2017–2018, 34 (39.5%) from 2018–2019, and 6 (7%) from October 2020–November 2021. HA-RSV was diagnosed a median of 14 days (IQR, 8–45) after admission. Moreover, 29 (33.7%), 31 (36.0%), and 26 (30.2%) cases were aged 60 months during these, respective seasons. Also, 33 (38.4%) had &gt;3 comorbid conditions, most commonly gastrointestinal (n = 33, 38.4%), respiratory (n = 28, 32.6%), and/or congenital–genetic disorders (n = 28, 32.6%). However, 9 (10.5%) had no comorbid conditions. From day −2 to day +4, 15 children (17.4%) were transferred to the PICU and 38 (49.3%) of 77 evaluable cases required respiratory support escalation, most commonly supplemental oxygen delivered by nasal cannula (n = 15, 19.5%). Furthermore, 11 patients (14.3%) required invasive support. Conclusions: HA-RSV was associated with use of healthcare resources, including the need for respiratory support escalation and/or transfer to intensive care. From October 2020 to November 2021, lower numbers of HA-RSV were observed. The reasons for this are unknown, but potentially occurred in parallel to markedly reduced RSV in the community and may have resulted from visitor restrictions, which included no siblings and/or universal masking by hospital staff and visitors.Funding: Funding for this research was provided by Merck Sharp &amp; Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck &amp; Co.Disclosures: None

The effectiveness of high-flow nasal cannula and standard non-rebreathing mask for oxygen therapy in moderate category COVID-19 pneumonia: Randomised controlled trial.

Background COVID-19 caused by the highly infectious severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is a matter of concern and has led to severe health problems all over the world. Oxygen therapy is the mainstay for the management of patients suffering from various stages of the disease. Objectives To compare the effectiveness of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and standard non-rebreathing mask (NRBM) as oxygen delivery devices in moderate cases of COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods A single-centre, open-label, randomised controlled trial was conducted between February 2021 and April 2021. All the enrolled patients (N=120) were randomly allocated into two groups according to the oxygen delivery device used. Group 1 (n=60) received HFNC and group 2 (n=60) received NRBM as the initial oxygen delivery device, to maintain a target saturation ≥96% in both groups. The progression-free survival without escalation of respiratory support, partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO2 ), a ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fractional inspiratory oxygen concentration (PaO2 /FiO2 ), respiratory rate, heart rate, blood pressure, number of patients requiring non-invasive ventilation or endotracheal intubation, time for de-escalation of oxygen therapy to lower FiO2 device, time to progression to severe disease, survival at day 28, and patient satisfaction level were compared between the two groups. Results Demographic, clinical variables and treatment received were comparable in the two groups. In the HFNC group, 90% of patients had successful outcomes with the initial oxygen therapy device used as compared with 56.6% in the NRBM group (p<0.001; odds ratio (OR) 0.145; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.054 - 0.389). Using HFNC also resulted in improved oxygenation (PaO2 /FiO2 ) (p<0.001), better patient satisfaction (p<0.001), and a shorter time for de-escalation of oxygen therapy to a lower FiO2 device (p<0.001). The 28-day survival was higher in the HFNC group, but the difference was statistically insignificant (p=0.468). Conclusion HFNC is a reliable oxygen therapy modality for moderate category COVID-19 pneumonia and results in a higher success rate of oxygen therapy, better oxygenation, and a greater patient satisfaction level as compared with a NRBM.

Evaluation of the applicability of the current CDC pediatric ventilator-associated events (PedVAE) surveillance definition in the neonatal intensive care unit population

BackgroundThere is limited data on pediatric ventilator-associated events (PedVAE) in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) setting, since the CDC mandated state reporting of these events in January 2019. This study sought to describe PedVAE rates and characteristics in the NICU population.MethodsSingle-center case-control study of infants requiring mechanical ventilation in a 39-bed level IV NICU between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2020. Baseline infant demographic, respiratory support and antibiotic use data was obtained and comparisons were performed between patients with potential PedVAEs and those without events.ResultTwo hundred and nine infants were mechanically ventilated. Two of the 126 patients ventilated for ≥4 days met CDC criteria for PedVAEs with a total of 3 events, and 32 (25%) received antibiotics with escalation of respiratory support, primarily for tracheitis.ConclusionNICU-specific data on PedVAE is limited. Only 2 infants in the study period met the current CDC criteria for PedVAE with a rate of 0.9 events per 1000 ventilator days. The current CDC PedVAE definition might be inadequate to identify actionable VAEs to inform prevention efforts in the NICU population, and alternate indices could better characterize these events.

Chest X-ray Does Not Predict the Risk of Endotracheal Intubation and Escalation of Treatment in COVID-19 Patients Requiring Noninvasive Respiratory Support.

Forms of noninvasive respiratory support (NIRS) have been widely used to avoid endotracheal intubation in patients with coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19). However, inappropriate prolongation of NIRS may delay endotracheal intubation and worsen patient outcomes. The aim of this retrospective study was to assess whether the CARE score, a chest X-ray score previously validated in COVID-19 patients, may predict the need for endotracheal intubation and escalation of respiratory support in COVID-19 patients requiring NIRS. From December 2020 to May 2021, we included 142 patients receiving NIRS who had a first chest X-ray available at NIRS initiation and a second one after 48–72 h. In 94 (66%) patients, the level of respiratory support was increased, while endotracheal intubation was required in 83 (58%) patients. The CARE score at NIRS initiation was not predictive of the need for endotracheal intubation (odds ratio (OR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96–1.06) or escalation of treatment (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.96–1.07). In conclusion, chest X-ray severity, as assessed by the CARE score, did not allow predicting endotracheal intubation or escalation of respiratory support in COVID-19 patients undergoing NIRS.

Standardization of Pediatric Noncardiac Operating Room to Intensive Care Unit Handoffs Improves Communication and Patient Care.

Handoffs are critical points in transitioning care between multidisciplinary teams, yet data regarding intensive care unit (ICU) handoffs in pediatric noncardiac surgical patients are lacking. We hypothesized that standardized handoffs from the pediatric operating room (OR) to the ICU would improve physician presence, communication, and patient care parameters. This quality improvement initiative was performed at a tertiary children's hospital. Stakeholders (anesthesiologists, nurses, intensivists, and surgeons) developed a standardized OR to pediatric and neonatal ICU handoff process based on common goals and outcomes of interest. Baseline data were collected before intervention. Implementation was carried out in 2 phases, phase 1 with a written handoff and Phase 2 with a scripted handoff process. Data collected by trained observers included handoff attendance, distractions, and transfer of essential patient information. As a surrogate for outcomes, patient care parameter data were collected for 6 hours after transfer. After phase 1, surgery and ICU physician attendance increased significantly, distractions decreased, and communication of essential patient data improved. In phase 2 (scripted handoff), attendance continued to rise, distractions remained decreased, and transfer of essential information was still improved compared with baseline. Mean handoff duration did not significantly change throughout the study. Certain patient care parameters (escalation of respiratory support, additional laboratory studies, vasopressor administration, antibiotic administration and timing) remained unchanged compared with baseline. However, the need for resuscitative fluid bolus or blood products significantly decreased after implementation phase 2. Standardized handoffs for pediatric noncardiac surgical patients from the OR to the ICU can improve provider attendance and communication.

Blood circulation changes associated with switching to non-invasive ventilation in COVID-19 patients

Background. Various methods of respiratory support in combination with prone positioning have been used during the COVID-19 pandemic. The effects of combination of these two factors on hemodynamics are of interest for clinical practitioners.The aim: to evaluate the effect of prone positioning on hemodynamics in COVID-19 patients depending on the method of respiratory support.Materials and methods. The study included 17 patients of both sexes diagnosed with COVID-19-associated community-acquired polysegmental viral and bacterial pneumonia with progressive respiratory failure. The study consisted of two stages. During the first stage, the patients were receiving respiratory support with humidified oxygen (3–7 liters per minute). The second stage was initiated after switching to noninvasive ventilation (NIV). The measurements were performed using a technique of volumetric compression oscillometry on a non-invasive hemodynamic monitoring system KAP CGosm-Globus (Russia).Results. The study showed that prone positioning in patients with severe COVID-19 when switching from oxygen therapy to NIV resulted in a change in the diastolic blood pressure difference module from 2.5 (1.0; 8.2) to 8.0 (5.7; 14.0) (p = 0.016). Escalation of respiratory support led to the changes in the left ventricular outflow tract velocity difference module from 11.5 (9.5; 34.2) to 31.0 (15.7; 42.0) (p = 0.049).Conclusions. Patients with community-acquired polysegmental viral and bacterial pneumonia associated with COVID-19 demonstrated changes in diastolic blood pressure and left ventricular outflow tract velocity as a result of prone positioning following switching from oxygen therapy to NIV.

796. Burden of Healthcare-associated (HA) Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) in Hospitalized Adults

BackgroundLittle is known about the burden of HA-RSV in hospitalized adults. We assessed risk factors and clinical outcomes in hospitalized adults diagnosed with HA-RSV.MethodsA retrospective case-control study was performed from 2017-2020 in two academic hospital systems. HA-RSV cases were >18 years of age, hospitalized >4 days, and developed new or worsening respiratory signs and symptoms that prompted clinicians to test for respiratory pathogens; cases were RSV-positive by PCR assays. Two community-onset (CO) RSV-positive controls (admitted with >2 acute respiratory symptoms), were matched to each HA-RSV case by age, sex, and RSV season. We compared risk factors and outcomes in cases vs. controls. We assessed escalation of respiratory support in HA-RSV cases, defined as new or increased respiratory support from Day -2 to Day +4 of their RSV-positive test. Exact conditional logistic regression compared outcomes of HA-RSV vs. CO-RSV subjects, adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics.Results84 cases and 160 controls (both median 64 years) were included; 87% had ≥1 comorbidity. HA-RSV cases were hospitalized for a median of 10 (IQR: 5-17) days prior to their RSV-positive test. CO-RSV controls were more likely to have pulmonary comorbidities than HA-RSV cases (46% vs. 31%, p=0.02). 38% of HA-RSV vs. 15% of CO-RSV subjects were hospitalized ≥15 days after their RSV-positive test (p=0.047). 14% of HA-RSV and 6% of CO-RSV subjects died (p=0.25). Among patients who survived, HA-RSV cases were more likely discharged to a skilled nursing or rehabilitation facility than CO-RSV controls (46% vs. 17%, p=0.04). Of the 44 HA-RSV cases assessed thus far, 25% required escalation of respiratory support; none required initiation of mechanical ventilation.ConclusionHA-RSV was associated with increased morbidity and increased health care resource use during and after hospitalization. RSV vaccines could prevent CO- and HA-RSV infections in adults.Disclosures Edward E. Walsh, MD, GSK (Advisor or Review Panel member)Janssen (Grant/Research Support)Merck (Grant/Research Support)Merck (Grant/Research Support) William G. Greendyke, MD, Merck (Grant/Research Support) Angela Branche, MD, Merck Dohme and Sharpe (Grant/Research Support) Ann Falsey, MD, BioFire Diagnostics (Grant/Research Support)Janssen (Grant/Research Support)Merck (Grant/Research Support)Novavax (Other Financial or Material Support, DSMB member)Pfizer (Grant/Research Support) Matthew R. Phillips, MPH, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Yoonyoung Choi, PhD, MS, RPh, Merck (Employee) Lyn Finelli, DrPH, MS, Merck (Employee) Lisa Saiman, MD, MPH, Merck (Grant/Research Support, Research Grant or Support)Merk Co., Inc (Grant/Research Support, Advisor or Review Panel member)

A New Trick for an Old Dog: L-Epinephrine Delivered Continuously in the Vapor Phase.

OBJECTIVES:Inhaled L-epinephrine is a known treatment of severe croup and postextubation upper airway obstruction. L-epinephrine can be delivered continuously in the vapor phase, but the indications, safety, and efficacy of this novel practice have yet to be evaluated. Theoretical risks are tachycardia, hypertension, and dysrhythmias. The study objective was to describe patient characteristics and vital sign changes related to continuous vaporized L-epinephrine use in critically ill children with the hypothesis that it can be practically and safely administered to children with subglottic edema and lower airway obstruction.DESIGN:Retrospective cohort study.SETTING:PICU and cardiothoracic ICU in a tertiary academic children’s hospital.PATIENTS:Patients age 0–21 years treated with continuous vaporized L-epinephrine from 2013 to 2019.INTERVENTIONS:None.MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Continuous vaporized L-epinephrine was administered 140 times to 129 subjects via a high-flow nasal oxygen device. The median age was 10.6 months (1.3; interquartile range, 4.8–17.1 mo). The most common indications were lower respiratory tract obstruction (45%), postextubation subglottic edema (31%), and croup (16%). Eighty-eight percent had no escalation of respiratory support within 24 hours of initiation of continuous vaporized L-epinephrine, 5% progressed to require endotracheal intubation, and 3% were reintubated within 24 hours of initiation of continuous vaporized L-epinephrine following an extubation attempt. After starting continuous vaporized L-epinephrine, 85% of subjects had a decrease in heart rate and 80% had a decrease in respiratory rate. Six subjects had an increase in heart rate, and eight had an increase in blood pressure of more than 20% from baseline. These subjects did not receive interventions specific to these vital sign changes, including discontinuation of continuous vaporized L-epinephrine.CONCLUSIONS:Continuous vaporized L-epinephrine was safely administered to critically ill children with most subjects demonstrating a decrease in heart rate, blood pressure, and respiratory rate.

Association of Fluid Overload with Escalation of Respiratory Support and Endotracheal Intubation in Acute Bronchiolitis Patients.

Fluid overload has been associated with increased oxygen requirement, prolonged duration of mechanical ventilation, and longer length of hospital stay in children hospitalized with pulmonary diseases. Critically ill infants with bronchiolitis admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) also tend to develop fluid overload and there is limited information of its role on noninvasive respiratory support. Thus, our primary objective was to study the association of fluid overload in patients with bronchiolitis admitted to the PICU with respiratory support escalation (RSE) and need for endotracheal intubation (ETI). Infants ≤24 months of age with bronchiolitis and admitted to the PICU between 9/2009 and 6/2015 were retrospectively studied. Demographic variables, clinical characteristics including type of respiratory support and need for ETI were evaluated. Fluid overload as assessed by net fluid intake and output (net fluid balance), cumulative fluid balance (CFB) (mL/kg), and percentage fluid overload (FO%), was compared between patients requiring and not requiring RSE and among patients requiring ETI and not requiring ETI at 0 (PICU admission), 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96, and 120 hours. One-hundred sixty four of 283 patients with bronchiolitis admitted to the PICU qualified for our study. Thirty-four of 164 (21%) patients required escalation of respiratory support within 5 days of PICU admission and of these 34 patients, 11 patients required ETI. Univariate analysis by Kruskal-Wallis test of fluid overload as assessed by net fluid balance, CFB, and FO% between 34 patients requiring and 130 patients not requiring RSE and among 11 patients requiring ETI and 153 patients not requiring ETI, at 0, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 and 120 hours did not reveal any significant difference ( p >0.05) at any time interval. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed higher PRISM score (odds ratio [OR]: 4.95, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.79-13.66; p = 0.002), longer hours on high flow nasal cannula (OR: 4.86, 95% CI: 1.68-14.03; p = 0.003) and longer hours on noninvasive ventilation (OR: 11.16, 95% CI: 3.36-36.98; p < 0.001) were associated with RSE. Fluid overload as assessed by net fluid balance, CFB, and FO% was not associated with RSE or need for ETI in critically ill bronchiolitis patients admitted to the PICU. Further prospective studies involving larger number of patients with bronchiolitis are needed to corroborate our findings.

Noninvasive Ventilation in Patients With COVID-19-Related Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Introduction: Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) has been used to alleviate hypoxemia and dyspnea, but there is no consensus on the application of NIV in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Some staff use NIV as the rescue therapy which might lead to the adverse outcomes. This study was to identify early factors associated with intubation to help the medical staff select appropriate patients for receiving NIV treatment.Methods: Patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 who were treated with NIV in emergency department or ICU of the Third People's Hospital (the only designated hospital for treating COVID-19 in Shenzhen) between January 1 and August 31, 2020, were retrospectively analyzed.Results: Thirty-nine patients with COVID-19 treated with NIV were included; of them, 16 (41%) received endotracheal intubation and 3 (8%) died. Significant differences were observed between intubated and non-intubated patients in PaO2/FiO2 before NIV initiation, hospitalization duration, NIV as the rescue therapy, and PaO2/FiO2 of ≤200 mmHg after 1–2 h of NIV initiation. Notably, 1–2 h after NIV initiation, a PaO2/FiO2 of ≤200 mmHg (odds ratio [OR], 9.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.84–47.62; P = 0.007) and NIV as the rescue therapy (OR, 5.43; 95% CI, 1.09–27.12; P = 0.039) were the risk factors for intubation.Conclusions: In patients with COVID-19-related acute hypoxemic respiratory failure receiving NIV, close attention should be paid to PaO2/FiO2 after 1–2 h of NIV initiation. Also, using NIV as rescue therapy should draw our awareness that it might delay escalation of respiratory support and lead to adverse outcomes.

A Retrospective Analysis of Feeding Practices and Complications in Patients with Critical Bronchiolitis on Non-Invasive Respiratory Support.

Limited data exist regarding feeding pediatric patients managed on non-invasive respiratory support (NRS) modes that augment oxygenation and ventilation in the setting of acute respiratory failure. We conducted a retrospective cohort study to explore the safety of feeding patients managed on NRS with acute respiratory failure secondary to bronchiolitis. Children up to two years old with critical bronchiolitis managed on continuous positive airway pressure, bilevel positive airway pressure, or RAM cannula were included. Of the 178 eligible patients, 64 were reportedly nil per os (NPO), while 114 received enteral nutrition (EN). Overall equivalent in severity of illness, younger patients populated the EN group, while the NPO group experienced a higher incidence of intubation. Duration of stay in the pediatric intensive care unit and non-invasive respiratory support were shorter in the NPO group, though intubation eliminated the former difference. Within the EN group, ninety percent had feeds initiated within 48 h and 94% reached full feeds within 7 days of NRS initiation, with an 8% complication and <1% aspiration rate. Reported complications did not result in escalation of respiratory support. Notably, a significant improvement in heart rate and respiratory rate was noted after feeds initiation. Taken together, our study supports the practice of early enteral nutrition in patients with critical bronchiolitis requiring NRS.

Randomised controlled trial of high-flow nasal cannula in preterm infants after extubation.

HFNC therapy is increasingly used as ‘non-invasive’ respiratory support for preterm infants. A 2016 Cochrane Review found that HFNC had similar efficacy to NCPAP for preterm infants following extubation,1 but that further studies were needed, particularly in extremely preterm infants born <28 weeks' gestation, who are at highest risk of extubation failure. The trial by Uchiyama et al is the largest randomised trial of HFNC as post-extubation support in preterm infants, and one of only a few to enrol extremely preterm infants (168 infants enrolled; 76 HFNC, 92 NCPAP/NIPPV). This multicentre non-inferiority trial found NCPAP/NIPPV was superior to HFNC (and HFNC did not satisfy non-inferiority criteria) for the primary outcome of treatment failure within 7 days. Reintubation rates were similar; more than 80% of infants who met HFNC treatment failure criteria avoided reintubation due to crossover to NCPAP/NIPPV. Like previous similar trials2-4 the intervention was not blinded, although objective treatment failure criteria were used. In the NCPAP/NIPPV group, 149 infants received NCPAP and 47 received NIPPV at extubation. In both groups, the escalation of respiratory support was at clinician discretion. As the control group could receive either NCPAP or NIPPV, the definition of ‘treatment failure’ is blurred: some infants received NIPPV before ‘treatment failure’ and others did not. It is not reported whether NIPPV inflations were synchronised with the infant's breathing or not, which may be important.5 A non-inferiority trial design is reasonable given the existing evidence, although the sample size calculation assumed a HFNC treatment failure rate 9% higher than that of NCPAP/NIPPV, and the chosen non-inferiority margin was rather large. There is an imbalance in the allocation of infants to HFNC (47%) and NCPAP/NIPPV (53%). A total of 378 infants were ultimately recruited to the study (38 more than required, even with inflation for anticipated dropouts); however this represents only 33% of eligible infants, which has implications for generalisability of the results. The use of respiratory stimulants prior to extubation is not reported. The trial was prospectively registered; however, there are inconsistencies between the registration and the published trial in the stated sample size, comparator and primary outcome. The starting HFNC gas flow was >2 L/min, lower than some previous studies,3, 4 and it is unclear whether infants received the maximal permitted gas flow of 8 L/min prior to treatment failure being determined. As increasing gas flow is associated with increased delivered pressure,6 this may have contributed to decreased efficacy in the HFNC group. Extubation failure in preterm infants is an important concern for neonatal clinicians, and the optimal mode of post-extubation respiratory support remains uncertain. The results of the trial by Uchiyama et al may tip the balance in favour of NCPAP/NIPPV as initial post-extubation support; however, consistent with previous evidence, reintubation rates are similar when HFNC is used with the ‘backup’ of NCPAP/NIPPV. For the most immature infants at highest risk of extubation failure, it seems prudent to avoid using HFNC as initial post-extubation support. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. https://ebneo.org/HFNC-after-extubation

A Longitudinal Cohort Study Using a Modified Child-Pugh Score to Escalate Respiratory Support in COVID-19 Patients - Hubei Province, China, 2020.

Background:We explored a phenotype of liver dysfunction based on modified Child-Pugh (MCP) with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and evaluated its relationship with escalation of respiratory support and survival. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study involving COVID-19 in-patients at the Wuhan Jinyintan Hospital. This study was performed between January 24, 2020 and March 31, 2020. Escalation of respiratory support and survival were evaluated. Furthermore, the trajectory of liver function was delineated considering the risk of escalation of respiratory support and survival using multilevel logistic regression. Results:A total of 298 patients were enrolled in this study. A higher proportion of patients with MCP-B on admission exhibited an escalated respiratory support (26 of 55; 47.3%) when compared to patients with MCP-A (9 of 62; 14.5%), indicating that MCP-B was strongly associated with escalation of respiratory support [adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 4.530; 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.060–9.970; P<0.001]. Among the patients on escalated respiratory support, 5 (55.6% of 9) patients with MCP-A died compared to 10 (38.5% of 26) of the patients with MCP-B. Patients with a history of liver disease had a higher mortality risk (adjusted HR: 7.830; 95% CI: 1.260-48.420). Conclusion:MCP is efficient at stratifying liver dysfunction levels in COVID-19 patients and is strongly associated with escalation of respiratory support.

Delving beneath the surface of hyperinflammation in COVID-19.

Delving beneath the surface of hyperinflammation in COVID-19.

6 Factors associated with treatment failure of high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) among children with bronchiolitis: a single centre retrospective study

Abstract Background Bronchiolitis is the most common viral lower respiratory tract infection in children under two years of age and is the leading cause of hospital admission for children under the age of one year. Respiratory support for bronchiolitis with high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is increasingly being used outside of critical care areas and in community hospitals. It is important to understand the patient factors associated with HFNC treatment failure in order to identify which patients are at higher risk for requiring escalation of respiratory support and transfer to a pediatric critical care centre. Objectives The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the patient characteristics that are associated with HFNC treatment failure in bronchiolitis. Design/Methods We completed a retrospective review of patients under 24 months of age with a clinical diagnosis of bronchiolitis admitted to a single tertiary level children’s hospital for supportive management with HFNC between January 2014 and December 2018. Patients who were mechanically ventilated or on non-invasive positive pressure ventilation prior to the initiation of HFNC during their hospital stay were excluded. HFNC treatment failure was the primary endpoint of the study, with treatment failure defined as escalation to non-invasive positive pressure or invasive mechanical ventilation. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify the patient demographic, clinical, and biochemical parameters associated with HFNC failure. Results Four hundred and thirty-five patient charts were identified, of which 208 patients met inclusion criteria for the study. Of these patients, 61 (29%) were classified as HFNC treatment failures. The likelihood of failing HFNC support was reduced with older age (OR 0.89; 95% CI 0.81, 0.97; p= 0.011) and greater time spent on HFNC (OR 0.94; 95% CI 0.92, 0.96; p&amp;lt;0.001). Patients with a Modified Tal score greater than 5 at 4 hours of HFNC treatment had a greater likelihood of failing HFNC support (OR 2.81; 95% CI 1.04, 7.64; p= 0.042). Conclusion This was the first study to examine predictors of HFNC failure among Canadian children with bronchiolitis. We found that patient age, time spent on HFNC, and severity of bronchiolitis as defined using a Modified Tal score were associated with HFNC failure. These patient factors should be considered when initiating HFNC for bronchiolitis, and may identify patients at risk for escalation of respiratory support, warranting earlier referral to pediatric critical care centres.

Histogram analysis for bedside respiratory monitoring in not critically ill preterm neonates: a proposal for a new way to look at the monitoring data.

Despite robust evidence in favour of maintaining optimal oxygen saturation targets in the preterm infants, the titration of oxygen is largely dependent on manual observations and transcription. Similarly, notwithstanding the gaining popularity of non-invasive modalities like high-flow nasal therapy, the practices of weaning and escalating support are largely individualized and based on point of care observations. These are often erroneous and lack objectivity. Histogram analysis from patient monitors is an easy and objective way of quantifying vital parameters and their trends. We review the technology and evidence available behind this practice.Conclusions: Though there are no randomized controlled trials on this practice solely, we identify several quality improvement studies implementing this into practice with benefit. We also cite studies which have implemented histogram analysis in methodology, thus concluding that this is a useful clinical tool worth incorporating into clinical practice to reduce manual errors and bring more objectivity into decisions.What is Known:• The data from NeOProM (Neonatal Oxygenation Prospective Meta-analysis Collaboration study protocol) indicates that optimal saturation targets for preterm infants born < 28 weeks should be between 91 and 95%.• The most “failsafe” way of maintaining strict compliance to these limits is automated oxygen titration but this is not widely used or available and manual transcription and monitoring are susceptible to error and fatigue.What is New:• Histogram analysis from patient monitors can provide intelligent data on respiratory monitoring and can be incorporated into algorithm to decide on weaning or escalation of respiratory support.• With appropriate training, histogram monitoring by nursing staff can limit fatigue of manual recording of data.

High-Flow Nasal Cannula in the Immediate Postoperative Period: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Studies have demonstrated that high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) prevents intubation in acute hypoxic respiratory failure when compared with conventional oxygen therapy (COT). However, the data examining routine HFNC use in the immediate postoperative period are less clear. Is routine HFNC use superior to COT or noninvasive ventilation (NIV) use in preventing intubation in patients postoperatively? We comprehensively searched databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science) to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effect of HFNC use with that of COT or NIV in the immediate postoperative period on reintubation, escalation of respiratory support, hospital mortality, ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS), postoperative hypoxemia, and treatment complications. We assessed individual study risk of bias (RoB) by using the revised Cochrane RoB 2 tool and rated certainty in outcomes by using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. We included 11 RCTs enrolling 2,201 patients. Ten compared HFNC with COT and one with NIV. Compared with COT use, HFNC use in the postoperative period was associated with a lower reintubation rate (relative risk [RR], 0.32; 95%CI, 0.12-0.88; absolute risk reduction [ARR], 2.9%; moderate certainty) and decreased escalation of respiratory support (RR, 0.54; 95%CI, 0.31-0.94; ARR, 5.8%; very low certainty). Post hoc subgroup analysis suggested that this effect was driven by patients who were obese and/or at high risk (subgroup differences, P= .06). We did not find differences in any of the other stated outcomes between HFNC and COT. HFNC was also no different from NIV in reintubation rate, respiratory therapy failure, or ICU LOS. With evidence of moderate certainty, prophylactic HFNC reduces reintubation and escalation of respiratory support compared with COT in the immediate postoperative period after cardiothoracic surgery. This effect is likely driven by patients who are at high risk and/or obese. These findings support postoperative prophylactic HFNC use in the patients who are at high risk and/or obese undergoing cardiothoracic surgery.