Management Of Acute Respiratory Failure Research Articles

Advanced Respiratory Monitoring during Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

Advanced respiratory monitoring encompasses a diverse range of mini- or noninvasive tools used to evaluate various aspects of respiratory function in patients experiencing acute respiratory failure, including those requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support. Among these techniques, key modalities include esophageal pressure measurement (including derived pressures), lung and respiratory muscle ultrasounds, electrical impedance tomography, the monitoring of diaphragm electrical activity, and assessment of flow index. These tools play a critical role in assessing essential parameters such as lung recruitment and overdistention, lung aeration and morphology, ventilation/perfusion distribution, inspiratory effort, respiratory drive, respiratory muscle contraction, and patient-ventilator synchrony. In contrast to conventional methods, advanced respiratory monitoring offers a deeper understanding of pathological changes in lung aeration caused by underlying diseases. Moreover, it allows for meticulous tracking of responses to therapeutic interventions, aiding in the development of personalized respiratory support strategies aimed at preserving lung function and respiratory muscle integrity. The integration of advanced respiratory monitoring represents a significant advancement in the clinical management of acute respiratory failure. It serves as a cornerstone in scenarios where treatment strategies rely on tailored approaches, empowering clinicians to make informed decisions about intervention selection and adjustment. By enabling real-time assessment and modification of respiratory support, advanced monitoring not only optimizes care for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome but also contributes to improved outcomes and enhanced patient safety.

Lung ultrasound score predicts outcomes in patients with acute respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 treated with non-invasive respiratory support: a prospective cohort study

BackgroundLung ultrasound has demonstrated its usefulness in several respiratory diseases management. One derived score, the Lung Ultrasound (LUS) score, is considered a good outcome predictor in patients with Acute Respiratory Failure (ARF). Nevertheless, it has not been tested in patients undergoing non-invasive respiratory support (NIRS). Taking this into account, the aim of this study is to evaluate LUS score as a predictor of 90-day mortality, ETI (Endotracheal intubation) and HFNC (High Flow Nasal Cannula) failure in patients with ARF due to COVID-19 admitted to a Respiratory Intermediate Care Unit (RICU) for NIRS management.ResultsOne hundred one patients were admitted to the RICU during the study period. Among these 76% were males and the median age was 55 (45–64) years. Initial ARF management started with HFNC, the next step was the use of Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) devices and the last intervention was ETI and Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission. Of the total study population, CPAP was required in 40%, ETI in 26%, while 15% died. By means of a ROC analysis, a LUS ≥ 25 points was identified as the cut-off point for mortality(AUC 0.81, OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.71; p < 0.001), ETI (AUC 0.83, OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.70; p < 0.001) and HFNC failure (AUC 0.75, OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.41; p < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier survival curves also identified LUS ≥ 25 as a predictor of 90-days mortality (HR 4.16, 95% CI 1.27–13.6) and 30 days ETI as well.ConclusionIn our study, a ≥ 25 point cut-off of the Lung Ultrasound Score was identified as a good outcome prediction factor for 90-days mortality, ETI and HFNC failure in a COVID-19 ARF patients cohort treated in a RICU. Considering that LUS score is easy to calculate, a multicenter study to confirm our findings should be performed.

[Clinical research progress in non-invasive positive pressure ventilation in 2023].

Non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV) is a widely used method of providing respiratory support in a variety of clinical settings, including emergency departments, general wards, and intensive care units. The relevant research articles on NPPV published between 1st October 2022 and 30th September 2023 were retrieved from Medline and reviewed. In the management of acute respiratory failure (ARF) associated with COVID-19, studies have highlighted the significant influence of regional economic status on the choice of respiratory support strategies. It has been observed that NPPV is more suitable for patients with mild to moderate acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) than for those with severe ARDS, as the latter group has an increased risk of delayed intubation. In addition, patients with severe dyspnea tended to benefit more from NPPV compared with high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and conventional oxygen therapy, with a reduced risk of self-induced lung injury. For non-COVID-19-related ARF, research shows no significant differences in mortality and intubation rates between HFNC and NPPV in patients with hypercapnic ARF. The updated HACOR score and ROX score have been validated to have a high predictive value for clinical outcomes in patients receiving NPPV for hypoxemic ARF. With regard to weaning from invasive mechanical ventilation, immediate application of NPPV after extubation showed a lower mortality rate compared to continued invasive weaning. Moreover, NPPV with active humidification significantly decreased the reintubation rate within 7 days after extubation compared with HFNC. The choice between using NPPV and HFNC should be based on the specific etiology of the patient's condition. The potential effect of noninvasive high-frequency oscillatory ventilation on CO2 clearance was also investigated.

The Place of Non-Invasive Ventilation (NIV) in the Management of Acute Respiratory Failure in the Emergencies of Oran University Hospital Center

The Place of Non-Invasive Ventilation (NIV) in the Management of Acute Respiratory Failure in the Emergencies of Oran University Hospital Center

Comparative study between high flow nasal cannula, high velocity nasal insufllation and noninvasive ventilation in management of acute respiratory failure

Comparative study between high flow nasal cannula, high velocity nasal insufllation and noninvasive ventilation in management of acute respiratory failure

Acute Neuromuscular Respiratory Failure

Respiratory muscle weakness caused by neuromuscular disease can lead to both acute and chronic respiratory failure. Respiratory failure caused by Guillain-Barré syndrome and myasthenia gravis can potentially improve with disease-specific therapy. However, respiratory failure in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis is irreversible, and it may be necessary to provide full-time ventilation support along with additional assistance. Noninvasive ventilation is recommended for managing acute or acute-on-chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure caused by neuromuscular disease. It has also been effective in weaning patients off invasive mechanical ventilation. Although noninvasive ventilation offers numerous benefits over invasive mechanical ventilation, it is crucial to consider the specific contraindications and limitations of noninvasive ventilation and ensure its appropriate usage based on the patient's condition and needs. The timely recognition of neuromuscular respiratory failure is critical, as early intervention can be life-saving. This review focused on the clinical assessment and management of acute respiratory failure in neuromuscular diseases.

Early Discharge, Outpatient Evaluation, and Home Management of Acute Respiratory Failure from COVID-19 in Martinique.

A worldwide pandemic of viral infection due to SARS-CoV-2 (and its resultant disease, COVID-19) has been ongoing since 2019. Martinique was affected by a major wave in summer 2021, with saturation of the health system forcing the implementation of home care management. We conducted a retrospective, observational study that included patients treated in the KOVIDHOM 972 program. We included adult patients with SARS-CoV2 hypoxemic pneumonia and requiring 4 L per minute or less of oxygen. In total, 418 were discharged to home with oxygen therapy after hospitalization for SARS-CoV-2 hypoxemic acute pneumonia, and 416 were analyzed. Half (50.2%) were women. Mean age was 58.8 ± 13.0 years. Time from onset of symptoms to hospitalization was 9.1 ± 3.5 days, and average length of stay was 10.5 ± 7.4 days. Maximum oxygen flow during hospitalization was 6.9 ± 4.5 L/min in patients who did not require intensive care. Average oxygen flow at discharge was 1.8 ± 07 L/min. At 30 days after discharge, the readmission rate was 0.5% (95% CI: 0-1.18), and the death rate was 0.5% (95% CI 0-1.18). Our study shows a very low rate of readmission or death in COVID-19 patients discharged to home with oxygen therapy. These results highlight the possibility of safe home care in carefully selected patients. Such programs could be useful in pandemic or wide-scale emergency situations.

Lessons from COVID-19 in the management of acute respiratory failure.

Accumulated evidence supports the efficacy of noninvasive respiratory support therapies in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure, alleviating admissions to intensive care units. Noninvasive respiratory support strategies, including high-flow oxygen therapy, continuous positive airway pressure via mask or helmet and noninvasive ventilation, can be alternatives that may avoid the need for invasive ventilation. Alternating different noninvasive respiratory support therapies and introducing complementary interventions, like self-proning, may improve outcomes. Proper monitoring is warranted to ensure the efficacy of the techniques and to avoid complications while supporting transfer to the intensive care unit. This article reviews the latest evidence on noninvasive respiratory support therapies in COVID-19-related acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure.

High-value care for critically ill oncohematological patients: what do we know thus far?

The number of patients with cancer requiring intensive care unit admission is increasing around the world. The improvement in the pathophysiological understanding of this group of patients, as well as the increasingly better and more targeted treatment options for their underlying disease, has led to a significant increase in their survival over the past three decades. Within the organizational concepts, it is necessary to know what adds value in the care of critical oncohematological patients. Practices in medicine that do not benefit patients and possibly cause harm are called low-value practices, while high-value practices are defined as high-quality care at relatively low cost. In this article, we discuss ten domains with high-value evidence in the care of cancer patients: (1) intensive care unit admission policies; (2) intensive care unit organization; (3) etiological investigation of hypoxemia; (4) management of acute respiratory failure; (5) management of febrile neutropenia; (6) urgent chemotherapy treatment in critically ill patients; (7) patient and family experience; (8) palliative care; (9) care of intensive care unit staff; and (10) long-term impact of critical disease on the cancer population. The disclosure of such policies is expected to have the potential to change health care standards. We understand that it is a lengthy process, and initiatives such as this paper are one of the first steps in raising awareness and beginning a discussion about high-value care in various health scenarios.

Cuidados de alto valor para pacientes onco-hematológicos graves: o que sabemos até agora?

The number of patients with cancer requiring intensive care unit admission is increasing around the world. The improvement in the pathophysiological understanding of this group of patients, as well as the increasingly better and more targeted treatment options for their underlying disease, has led to a significant increase in their survival over the past three decades. Within the organizational concepts, it is necessary to know what adds value in the care of critical oncohematological patients. Practices in medicine that do not benefit patients and possibly cause harm are called low-value practices, while high-value practices are defined as high-quality care at relatively low cost. In this article, we discuss ten domains with high-value evidence in the care of cancer patients: (1) intensive care unit admission policies; (2) intensive care unit organization; (3) etiological investigation of hypoxemia; (4) management of acute respiratory failure; (5) management of febrile neutropenia; (6) urgent chemotherapy treatment in critically ill patients; (7) patient and family experience; (8) palliative care; (9) care of intensive care unit staff; and (10) long-term impact of critical disease on the cancer population. The disclosure of such policies is expected to have the potential to change health care standards. We understand that it is a lengthy process, and initiatives such as this paper are one of the first steps in raising awareness and beginning a discussion about high-value care in various health scenarios.

Treatment of pregnant and early postpartum women with severe and critical COVID-19: experience at a tertiary center

BackgroundThe management of acute respiratory failure during pregnancy is a poorly defined issue in the literature, especially regarding the use of the prone position and the appropriate time for delivery. This study describes our experience in treating pregnant and postpartum women with severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).Materials and methodsThis descriptive retrospective study included 25 pregnant and 4 postpartum women admitted to an ICU due to respiratory complications from COVID-19 from June 2020 to August 2021.ResultsThe mean maternal age was 33.6 years, and the median gestational age (GA) at admission was 33 weeks. Obesity was the most common comorbidity. The median time between symptom onset and ICU admission was 10 days, while the median length of ICU stay was 14 days. Invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) was required in 16 (55.2%) patients for a median time of 16.5 days. Prone positioning (PP) was performed in 68.7% of the patients on IMV, and resulted in an expressive increase in arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2 ratio). Eleven (44%) pregnant women delivered during their ICU stay for obstetric or fetal reasons: of these, 2 (18%) developed postpartum hemorrhagic shock and 1 (9%) developed abdominal wall infection. None of the 25 pregnant women underwent delivery due to acute respiratory failure or in an attempt to avoid intubation. There were 2 fetal deaths, but no maternal or neonatal deaths.ConclusionWe observed favorable outcomes in pregnant and postpartum women with severe and critical COVID-19 admitted to our institution. This finding reinforces the effectiveness of PP in the treatment of hypoxemic respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 in pregnant women undergoing IMV, and suggests that gestation should only be interrupted in cases of obstetric and fetal complications, provided the patient is stable, or when hypoxemia is refractory to PP.

Assessing mortality differences across acute respiratory failure management strategies in Covid-19.

PurposeProlonged observation could avoid invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and related risks in patients with Covid-19 acute respiratory failure (ARF) compared to initiating early IMV. We aimed to determine the association between ARF management strategy and in-hospital mortality.Materials and methodsPatients in the Weill Cornell Covid-19 registry who developed ARF between March 5 – March 25, 2020 were exposed to an early IMV strategy; between March 26 – April 1, 2020 to an intermediate strategy; and after April 2 to prolonged observation. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to model in-hospital mortality and test an interaction between ARF management strategy and modified sequential organ failure assessment (mSOFA).ResultsAmong 632 patients with ARF, 24% of patients in the early IMV strategy died versus 28% in prolonged observation. At lower mSOFA, prolonged observation was associated with lower mortality compared to early IMV (at mSOFA = 0, HR 0.16 [95% CI 0.04–0.57]). Mortality risk increased in the prolonged observation strategy group with each point increase in mSOFA score (HR 1.29 [95% CI 1.10–1.51], p = 0.002).ConclusionIn Covid-19 ARF, prolonged observation was associated with a mortality benefit at lower mSOFA scores, and increased mortality at higher mSOFA scores compared to early IMV.

Comparison of high-flow nasal oxygen therapy and noninvasive ventilation in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BackgroundAcute respiratory failure (ARF) is a major adverse event commonly encountered in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Although noninvasive mechanical ventilation (NIV) has long been used in the management of ARF, it has several adverse events which may cause patient discomfort and lead to treatment complication. Recently, high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has the potential to be an alternative for NIV in adults with ARF, including COVID-19 patients. The objective was to investigate the efficacy of HFNC compared to NIV in COVID-19 patients.MethodsThis meta-analysis was reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria. Literature search was carried out in electronic databases for relevant articles published prior to June 2021. The protocol used in this study has been registered in International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42020225186).ResultsAlthough the success rate of NIV is higher compared to HFNC (odds ratio [OR], 0.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.16–0.97; P=0.04), this study showed that the mortality in the NIV group is also significantly higher compared to HFNC group (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.39–0.63; P<0.001). Moreover, this study also demonstrated that there was no significant difference in intubation rates between the two groups (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.86–2.11; P=0.19). ConclusionsPatients treated with HFNC showed better outcomes compared to NIV for ARF due to COVID-19. Therefore, HFNC should be considered prior to NIV in COVID-19-associated ARF. However, further studies with larger sample sizes are still needed to better elucidate the benefit of HFNC in COVID-19 patients.

Dexmedetomidine for Sedation During Pediatric Noninvasive Ventilation.

Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) facilitates management of acute respiratory failure without intubation. Many pediatric patients cannot tolerate the discomfort associated with noninvasive support and require sedation with agents that may decrease respiratory drive. Dexmedetomidine does not decrease respiratory drive, and we hypothesized that its use would increase tolerance of noninvasive respiratory support without increasing risk for intubation. A retrospective chart review was performed of all subjects at least 3 months of age with acute respiratory failure requiring NIV who were admitted to the pediatric ICU at a children's hospital for a 3-y period from 2015-2018. Subjects were stratified to those receiving continuous dexmedetomidine versus those not receiving sedation. Medical history was reviewed for developmental delay (DD) or intellectual disability (ID) as well as basic demographic information. To control the association between these variables with both dexmedetomidine use and intubation, augmented inverse probability weighting was utilized to establish equivalent baselines between the dexmedetomidine and no-sedation groups. Primary outcome was intubation rate within 6 h of initiation of dexmedetomidine infusion or NIV. Based on the strong association between age and dexmedetomidine use, a statistical model including subjects > age 5 was not able to be generated, and these subjects were excluded from final analysis. One-hundred eight subjects were included in the final statistical analysis, with 60 receiving dexmedetomidine and 48 receiving no sedation. Dexmedetomidine was effective at reducing agitation, with no difference noted in intubation rate at 6 h between subjects receiving dexmedetomidine versus no sedation (13.1 vs 12.4%). Dexmedetomidine may allow tolerance of NIV in acute respiratory failure without increasing risk for intubation, especially in preschool age patients and those with DD or ID. A larger study involving multiple centers would help support our conclusions.

High-flow nasal oxygen therapy decrease the risk of mortality and the use of invasive mechanical ventilation in patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia? A retrospective and comparative study of 265 cases

IntroductionCorona virus disease (Covid-19) affects the airways and induces pulmonary lesions, patients with this disease require oxygen therapy as the disease progresses. Several oxygenation options have been used, l’HFNO had showed beneficial effects The objective of this studyTo evaluate the efficacy of high-flow nasal oxygen HFNO versus non-invasive ventilation in COVID-19. MethodsThis is a retrospective and comparative study conducted over a period of 10 months from March 2020 to December 2020 and involving 600 patients hospitalized in the intensive care unit of the CHU Mohammed VI of Oujda for the management of acute respiratory failure caused by COVID-19. ResultsOut of 600 patients with acute respiratory failure, 265 patients were included in the analyses. 162 (61.10%) patients were treated with HFNO, the intubation rate was 49.7% (80 patients out of 162) of which 63 died intubated (78.8%). Concerning the 82 non-intubated patients, only 16 died (19.8%).The total number of patients who received NIV was 71 (26.8%), 33 (46.5%) required mechanical ventilation. In-hospital mortality in patients treated with NIV was 100%.The difference in mortality outcome between the two groups was significantly (P < 0.0001) reduced in HFNO. ConclusionsTreatment with high-flow oxygen improved survival in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure compared with noninvasive ventilation, although no difference was observed in intubation rate

Role and limitations of high-flow nasal oxygen therapy in COVID-19 patients: An observational study.

The management of acute respiratory failure in COVID-19 patients and the role and limitations of high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (HFNOT) remain unclear. This study aimed to investigate the effect of HFNOT, identify the characteristics of patients who will benefit from therapy, and determine monitoring strategies to decide on endotracheal intubation for patients with COVID-19. We conducted a prospective observational study of COVID-19 patients who were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and required HFNOT for at least 2 days between 20 March 2020 and 20 June 2020. The exclusion criteria were a severe respiratory failure, reduced levels of consciousness, combination with other noninvasive ventilation strategies, and exhaustion. The patients were followed up until ICU discharge. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with COVID-19 who were successfully weaned from HFNOT, whereas failure comprised intubation or death on HFNOT. Thirty-five subjects (24 males, mean-age: 61.62, standard deviation: 14.9 yr.) were included in the study. A total of 20/35 (57.1%) subjects survived to discharge. C-reactive-protein (CRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels were significantly increased in the treatment failure group (CRP; effect size (r):0.35, P: 0.037, IL-6; r: 0.37, P: 0.03). Although there was a difference between repeated measures of partial-pressure-of-oxygen/fraction-of-inspired-oxygen (PaO2/FiO2:P/F) rates (partial-eta-squared (ηp2):0.79, P < 0.001), no difference was found between carbon dioxide levels (ηp2:0.29, p: 0.44). There was also no difference between ROX (ratio-of-oxygen-saturation/FiO2 to respiratory-rate) rates (Kendall's W: 0.33 P = 0.310). In COVID-19 patients with mild-to-moderate dyspnea and hypoxemia who are nonresponsive to conventional-oxygen-therapies, the initial approach may involve the use of HFNOT. In this study, patient monitoring could be performed with ROX and P/F ratios, and the effectiveness of the treatment could be decided by looking at these rates in the second hour. Prolongation of the period and awake prone positioning did not improve the outcome.

Management of Acute Respiratory Failure: A Case Report

In an Intensive Care Unit, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a serious condition. Non-cardiogenic pulmonary oedema was the prior name for it. It is caused by a variety of illnesses that cause lung injury, but sepsis is the most common cause. It causes interstitial and alveolar oedema, diffuse alveolar damage, refractory hypoxemia, and ventilation perfusion mismatch by damaging the alveolar capillary membrane. Dyspnoea with diffuse in ltration on chest X-ray is a typical clinical symptom. Low tidal volume, high positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP), and low plateau pressure are all used to treat ARDS. Prone placement improves patient perfusion and thereby increases the PaO/FiO ratio. To treat ARDS, doctors are increasingly turning to high frequency oscillation ventilation (HFOV)

PREDICTING THE NEED FOR INVASIVE VENTILATION WITH APACHE IV SCORE IN PATIENTS WITH SEPSIS FROM COMMUNITY ACQUIRED PNEUMONIA

TOPIC: Critical Care TYPE: Original Investigations PURPOSE: Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a leading cause of mortality worldwide. CAP mortality is driven by the development of sepsis and acute respiratory failure (ARF). Predicting the need for invasive ventilation in patients with sepsis from community-acquired pneumonia and early initiation of mechanical ventilation is a critical strategy in the management of ARF. Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV score has been evaluated in assessing the prognosis of critically ill patients. This study aims to predict the need for invasive ventilation with APACHE IV score in patients with sepsis from community-acquired pneumonia. The secondary outcomes were to predict hospital mortality, vasopressor requirements, and the duration of intensive care unit (ICU) stay. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed on adult ICU patients admitted with sepsis due to CAP from July 2017 until July 2020 at Metropolitan Hospital Centre. APACHE IV scores were calculated on patients on day one of admission. Based on day one APACHE IV score, patients were grouped into mild, moderate, and severe categories. Patients with APACHE IV score of 25-50 were grouped into the mild category, patients with APACHE IV score of 51-75 were grouped into the moderate category, and patients with APACHE IV score of more than 75 were grouped into the severe category. Each patient was evaluated for the outcomes of invasive ventilation, hospital mortality, vasopressor requirement, and duration of ICU stay. The outcomes were then compared between the three categories. RESULTS: In total, there were 93 patients selected. The mild category had 28 patients, the moderate category had 45 patients, and the severe category had 20 patients. The severe category had the highest need for invasive ventilation (85%), the highest hospital mortality (50%), and the highest vasopressor requirement (5.5 days). Statistical analysis was performed using ordinal regression and multinomial logistics. There was a trend towards statistical significance in the outcome of invasive ventilation requirement with a P-value of 0.06. The differences between the three categories were statistically significant in the vasopressor requirement with a P-value of 0.047. However, the outcomes of hospital mortality and duration of MICU stay were not statistically significant, with P values of 0.16 and 0.10, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with sepsis from community-acquired pneumonia, high APACHE IV scores can indicate a higher need for invasive ventilation and a higher need for vasopressor requirements. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The APACHE IV scoring system can be helpful in triaging patients with sepsis from CAP and in identifying patients at higher risk of acute respiratory failure and the need for invasive ventilation. DISCLOSURES: No relevant relationships by Antony Arumairaj, source=Web Response No relevant relationships by Imnett Habtes, source=Web Response No relevant relationships by Thomas Newman, source=Web Response No relevant relationships by Hansang Park, source=Web Response No relevant relationships by Julio Valencia, source=Web Response

Hybrid Strategy for the Management of Acute Respiratory Failure in the Setting of Chronic Tracheobronchomalacia

Hybrid Strategy for the Management of Acute Respiratory Failure in the Setting of Chronic Tracheobronchomalacia

ACP provided 2 conditional recommendations on use of high-flow nasal oxygen in acute respiratory failure.

Qaseem A, Etxeandia-Ikobaltzeta I, Fitterman N, et al. Appropriate use of high-flow nasal oxygen in hospitalized patients for initial or postextubation management of acute respiratory failure: a clinical guideline from the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2021;174:977-84. 33900796.