Impact of flow and temperature on patient comfort during respiratory support by high-flow nasal cannula

High-Flow Nasal Cannula Therapy for Exertional Dyspnea in Patients with Cancer: A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Exertional dyspnea is common in patients with cancer and limits their function. The impact of high-flow nasal cannula on exertional dyspnea in nonhypoxemic patients is unclear. In this double-blind, parallel-group, randomized trial, we assessed the effect of flow rate (high vs. low) and gas (oxygen vs. air) on exertional dyspnea in nonhypoxemic patients with cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with cancer with oxygen saturation >90% at rest and exertion completed incremental and constant work (80% maximal) cycle ergometry while breathing low-flow air at 2 L/minute. They were then randomized to receive high-flow oxygen, high-flow air, low-flow oxygen, or low-flow air while performing symptom-limited endurance cycle ergometry at 80% maximal. The primary outcome was modified 0-10 Borg dyspnea intensity scale at isotime. Secondary outcomes included dyspnea unpleasantness, exercise time, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Seventy-four patients were enrolled, and 44 completed the study (mean age 63; 41% female). Compared with low-flow air at baseline, dyspnea intensity was significantly lower at isotime with high-flow oxygen (mean change, -1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.1, -0.12) and low-flow oxygen (-1.83; 95% CI, -2.7, -0.9), but not high-flow air (-0.2; 95% CI, -0.97, 0.6) or low-flow air (-0.5; 95% CI, -1.3, 0.4). Compared with low-flow air, high-flow oxygen also resulted in significantly longer exercise time (difference + 2.5 minutes, p = .009), but not low-flow oxygen (+0.39 minutes, p = .65) or high-flow air (+0.63 minutes, p = .48). The interventions were well tolerated without significant adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

Our preliminary findings support that high-flow oxygen improved both exertional dyspnea and exercise duration in nonhypoxemic patients with cancer. (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02357134).

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

In this four-arm, double-blind, randomized clinical trial examining the role of high-flow nasal cannula on exertional dyspnea in patients with cancer without hypoxemia, high-flow oxygen, but not high-flow air, resulted in significantly lower dyspnea scores and longer exercise time. High-flow oxygen delivered by high-flow nasal cannula devices may improve clinically relevant outcomes even in patients without hypoxemia.

[Guideline for Long-Term Oxygen Therapy - S2k-Guideline Published by the German Respiratory Society]

Long-term oxygen therapy is of great importance both for reducing mortality and for improving performance in patients with chronic lung diseases. The prerequisites for Long-term oxygen therapy are adequate diagnostics and clearly defined indication. A causal distinction into chronic hypoxaemic and hypercapnic respiratory failure is reasonable, from which the differential indication for non-invasive ventilation results.The revised guideline covers the diagnostics and indication of chronic lung and heart diseases, the role of oxygen in terminal illness and gives a detailed description of available oxygen devices. The guideline is intended to help avoid undersupply, oversupply and false prescriptions. Furthermore, the chapter "Postacute Oxygen Therapy" discusses the procedure, relevant in everyday life, but not yet clearly defined, for prescribing oxygen therapy for the home at the end of an inpatient stay. Another important point, the correct prescription of mobile oxygen systems, is also presented in the guideline. This document is a revised version of the guideline for longterm oxygen therapy and replaces the version of 2008.

Nasal high flow higher than 60 L/min in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a physiological study

Background

Nasal high flow delivered at flow rates higher than 60 L/min in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure might be associated with improved physiological effects. However, poor comfort might limit feasibility of its clinical use.

Methods

We performed a prospective randomized cross-over physiological study on 12 ICU patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. Patients underwent three steps at the following gas flow: 0.5 L/kg PBW/min, 1 L/kg PBW/min, and 1.5 L/kg PBW/min in random order for 20 min. Temperature and FiO₂ remained unchanged. Toward the end of each phase, we collected arterial blood gases, lung volumes, and regional distribution of ventilation assessed by electrical impedance tomography (EIT), and comfort.

Results

In five patients, the etiology was pulmonary; infective disease characterized seven patients; median PaO₂/FiO₂ at enrollment was 213 [IQR 136–232]. The range of flow rate during NHF 1.5 was 75–120 L/min. PaO₂/FiO₂ increased with flow, albeit non significantly (p = 0.064), PaCO₂ and arterial pH remained stable (p = 0.108 and p = 0.105). Respiratory rate decreased at higher flow rates (p = 0.014). Inhomogeneity of ventilation decreased significantly at higher flows (p = 0.004) and lung volume at end-expiration significantly increased (p = 0.007), but mostly in the non-dependent regions. Comfort was significantly poorer during the step performed at the highest flow (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

NHF delivered at rates higher than 60 L/min in critically ill patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure is associated with reduced respiratory rate, increased lung homogeneity, and additional positive pressure effect, but also with worse comfort.

Use of nasal high flow oxygen during acute respiratory failure

Nasal high flow (NHF) has gained popularity among intensivists to manage patients with acute respiratory failure. An important literature has accompanied this evolution. In this review, an international panel of experts assessed potential benefits of NHF in different areas of acute respiratory failure management. Analyses of the physiological effects of NHF indicate flow-dependent improvement in various respiratory function parameters. These beneficial effects allow some patients with severe acute hypoxemic respiratory failure to avoid intubation and improve their outcome. They require close monitoring to not delay intubation. Such a delay may worsen outcome. The ROX index may help clinicians decide when to intubate. In immunocompromised patients, NHF reduces the need for intubation but does not impact mortality. Beneficial physiological effects of NHF have also been reported in patients with chronic respiratory failure, suggesting a possible indication in acute hypercapnic respiratory failure. When intubation is required, NHF can be used to pre-oxygenate patients either alone or in combination with non-invasive ventilation (NIV). Similarly, NHF reduces reintubation alone in low-risk patients and in combination with NIV in high-risk patients. NHF may be used in the emergency department in patients who would not be offered intubation and can be better tolerated than NIV.

Effect of High-Flow Nasal Cannula on Sleep-disordered Breathing and Sleep Quality in Patients With Acute Stroke

Introduction Sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) is common after stroke. Although the standard treatment of SDB is continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) ventilation, the patient's intolerance and discomfort result in low adherence rates. Alternatively, high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) may be useful as it reduces upper airway collapse with low level of positive pressure and well tolerability. The aim of this study was to investigate whether HFNC therapy reduces SDB and improves sleep quality with higher compliance rate. Methods We included acute stroke patients with SDB for the assessment of apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) >5/h using WatchPAT 200 (Itamar Medical Ltd, Caesarea, Israel). Patients who met inclusion criteria received HFNC therapy (40 L/min) with monitoring by WatchPAT. AHI, oxygen desaturation index (ODI), sleep efficiency, and rapid eye movement (REM) sleep were compared in patients with and without HFNC therapy. We also evaluated the patient's comfort of HFNC therapy (discomfort or not). Results Among 17 patients assessed for AHI, 12 received HFNC therapy. HFNC therapy was not adhered in two patients due to intolerance. Eight patients remained for final analysis. There were no differences in SDB and sleep quality with and without HFNC therapy as follows: HFNC therapy vs control; AHI 24.9 ± 20.1 vs 21.3 ± 15.0/h (p = 0.63), ODI 16.2 ± 16.5 vs 12.9 ± 12.3/h (p = 0.54), sleep efficiency 80.4 ± 12.9 vs 87.1 ± 6.2 (p = 0.28), percentage of REM sleep 19.4% ± 9.6% vs 27.6% ± 8.9% (p = 0.07). Two patients (17%) complained of discomfort among eight patients. Conclusion HFNC therapy did not improve SDB and sleep quality. Nonadherence and discomfort were observed in HFNC therapy. We need a large trial to confirm this result.

[Clinical experience of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy in severe COVID-19 patients]

Acute respiratory failure due to acute hypoxemia is the major manifestation in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Rational and effective respiratory support is crucial in the management of COVID-19 patients. High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has been utilized widely due to its superiority over other non-invasive respiratory support techniques. To avoid HFNC failure and intubation delay, the key issues are proper patients, timely application and improving compliance. It should be noted that elder patients are vulnerable for failed HFNC. We applied HFNC for oxygen therapy in severe and critical ill COVID-19 patients and summarized the following experiences. Firstly, to select the proper size of nasal catheter, to locate it at suitable place, and to confirm the nose and the upper respiratory airway unobstructed. Secondly, an initial ow of 60 L/min and 37℃ should be given immediately for patients with obvious respiratory distress or weak cough ability; otherwise, low-level support should be given first and the level gradually increased. Thirdly, to avoid hypoxia or hypoxemia, the treatment goal of HFNC should be maintained the oxygen saturation (SpO2) above 95% for patients without chronic pulmonary disease. Finally, patients should wear a surgical mask during HFNC treatment to reduce the risk of virus transmission through droplets or aerosols.

Physiological Comparison of High-Flow Nasal Cannula and Helmet Noninvasive Ventilation in Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure

Rationale: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and helmet noninvasive ventilation (NIV) are used for the management of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.Objectives: Physiological comparison of HFNC and helmet NIV in patients with hypoxemia.Methods: Fifteen patients with hypoxemia with Pa_O2/Fi_O2 < 200 mm Hg received helmet NIV (positive end-expiratory pressure ≥ 10 cm H₂O, pressure support = 10-15 cm H₂O) and HFNC (50 L/min) in randomized crossover order. Arterial blood gases, dyspnea, and comfort were recorded. Inspiratory effort was estimated by esophageal pressure (Pes) swings. Pes-simplified pressure-time product and transpulmonary pressure swings were measured.Measurements and Main Results: As compared with HFNC, helmet NIV increased Pa_O2/Fi_O2 (median [interquartile range]: 255 mm Hg [140-299] vs. 138 [101-172]; P = 0.001) and lowered inspiratory effort (7 cm H₂O [4-11] vs. 15 [8-19]; P = 0.001) in all patients. Inspiratory effort reduction by NIV was linearly related to inspiratory effort during HFNC (r = 0.84; P < 0.001). Helmet NIV reduced respiratory rate (24 breaths/min [23-31] vs. 29 [26-32]; P = 0.027), Pes-simplified pressure-time product (93 cm H₂O ⋅ s ⋅ min^-1 [43-138] vs. 200 [168-335]; P = 0.001), and dyspnea (visual analog scale 3 [2-5] vs. 8 [6-9]; P = 0.002), without affecting Pa_CO2 (P = 0.80) and comfort (P = 0.50). In the overall cohort, transpulmonary pressure swings were not different between treatments (NIV = 18 cm H₂O [14-21] vs. HFNC = 15 [8-19]; P = 0.11), but patients exhibiting lower inspiratory effort on HFNC experienced increases in transpulmonary pressure swings with helmet NIV. Higher transpulmonary pressure swings during NIV were associated with subsequent need for intubation.Conclusions: As compared with HFNC in hypoxemic respiratory failure, helmet NIV improves oxygenation, reduces dyspnea, inspiratory effort, and simplified pressure-time product, with similar transpulmonary pressure swings, Pa_CO2, and comfort.

High Flow Through Nasal Cannula in Stable and Exacerbated Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients

BACKGROUND

High-Flow through Nasal Cannula (HFNC) is a system delivering heated humidified air-oxygen mixture at a flow up to 60 L/min. Despite increasing evidence in hypoxemic acute respiratory failure, a few is currently known in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the rationale and physiologic advantages of HFNC in COPD patients, and to systematically review the literature on the use of HFNC in stable and exacerbated COPD patients, separately.

METHODS

A search strategy was launched on MEDLINE. Two authors separately screened all potential references. All (randomized, non-randomized and quasi-randomized) trials dealing with the use of HFNC in both stable and exacerbated COPD patients in MEDLINE have been included in the review.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies have been included. HFNC: 1) provides heated and humidified airoxygen admixture; 2) washes out the anatomical dead space of the upper airway; 3) generates a small positive end-expiratory pressure; 4) guarantees a more stable inspired oxygen fraction, as compared to conventional oxygen therapy (COT); and 5) is more comfortable as compared to both COT and non-invasive ventilation (NIV). In stable COPD patients, HFNC improves gas exchange, the quality of life and dyspnea with a reduced cost of muscle energy expenditure, compared to COT. In exacerbated COPD patients, HFNC may be an alternative to NIV (in case of intolerance) and to COT at extubation or NIV withdrawal.

CONCLUSION

Though evidence of superiority still lacks and further studies are necessary, HFNC might play a role in the treatment of both stable and exacerbated COPD patients.

Noninvasive approach for de novo acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: noninvasive ventilation, high-flow nasal cannula, both or none?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize the recent evidence regarding the use of noninvasive strategies for de novo acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF).

RECENT FINDINGS

New guidelines for the use of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in acute respiratory failure have been published. In parallel, high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is an emerging noninvasive strategy for AHRF patients. Although some have cautioned against the use of NIV in AHRF, new encouraging data about the use of a helmet interface for NIV in acute respiratory distress syndrome may overcome the limitations of facemask NIV.

SUMMARY

In the last two decades, the use of NIV and HFNC in patients with AHRF has considerably expanded, changing the paradigm of management of AHRF. Choice of each technique should be based according to centre experience and patient tolerability. However, when using noninvasive strategies for AHRF, it is crucial to predefine specific criteria for intubation and monitor patients closely for early detection of clinical deterioration to avoid delayed intubation.

[Factors associated to high-flow nasal cannula treatment failure in pediatric patients with respiratory failure in two pediatric intensive care units at high altitude]

INTRODUCTION

Acute respiratory failure is the leading cause of hospitalization in pediatrics. High-flow nasal cannulas (HFNCs) offer a new alternative, but the evidence and indications are still debated. The performance of HFNCs at high altitude has not been described to date.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the use of HFNCs in pediatric patients admitted with respiratory failure and explore the factors associated with treatment failure.

METHODOLOGY

A prospective cohort study was carried out in patients between 1 month and 18 years of age managed with HFNCs. The demographic and treatment response data were recorded at baseline and after 1, 6 and 24hours. The number of failures was determined, as well as the length of stay, complications and mortality. Patients with treatment failure were compared with the rest.

RESULTS

A total of 539 patients were enrolled. Infants (70.9%) of male sex (58.4%) and airway diseases such as asthma and bronchiolitis (61.2%) were more frequent. There were 53 failures (9.8%), with 21 occurring in the first 24hours. The median length of stay was 4 days (IQR 4); there were 5 deaths (0.9%) and 13 adverse events (epistaxis) (2.2%). Improvement was observed in vital signs and severity over time, with differences in the group that failed, but without interactions. The final logistic model established an independent relationship of failure between the hospital (OR 2.78, 95%CI 1.48-5.21) and the initial respiratory rate (OR 1.56, 95%CI 1.21-2.01).

CONCLUSIONS

HFNCs afford good clinical response, with few complications and a low failure rate. The differences found between institutions suggest a subjective relationship in the decision of therapy failure.

Effects of high-flow nasal cannula and non-invasive ventilation on inspiratory effort in hypercapnic patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a preliminary study

Background

Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) is preferred as the initial ventilatory support to treat acute hypercapnic respiratory failure in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) may be an alternative method; however, the effects of HFNC in hypercapnic COPD are not well known. This preliminary study aimed at assessing the physiologic effects of HFNC at different flow rates in hypercapnic COPD and to compare it with NIV.

Methods

A prospective physiologic study enrolled 12 hypercapnic COPD patients who had initially required NIV, and were ventilated with HFNC at flow rates increasing from 10 to 50 L/min for 15 min in each step. The primary outcome was the effort to breathe estimated by a simplified esophageal pressure–time product (sPTP_es). The other studied variables were respiratory rate, oxygen saturation (SpO₂), and transcutaneous CO₂ pressure (PtcCO₂).

Results

Before NIV initiation, the median [interquartile range] pH was 7.36 [7.28–7.37] with a PaCO₂ of 51 [42–60] mmHg. sPTP_es per minute was significantly lower with HFNC at 30 L/min than 10 and 20 L/min (p < 0.001), and did not significantly differ with NIV (median inspiratory/expiratory positive airway pressure of 11 [10–12] and [5–5] cmH₂O, respectively). At 50 L/min, sPTPes per minute increased compared to 30 L/min half of the patients. Respiratory rate was lower (p = 0.003) and SpO₂ was higher (p = 0.028) with higher flows (30–50 L/min) compared to flow rate of 10 L/min and not different than with NIV. No significant differences in PtcCO₂ between NIV and HFNC at different flow rates were observed (p = 0.335).

Conclusions

Applying HFNC at 30 L/min for a short duration reduces inspiratory effort in comparison to 10 and 20 L/min, and resulted in similar effect than NIV delivered at modest levels of pressure support in hypercapnic COPD with mild to moderate exacerbation. Higher flow rates reduce respiratory rate but sometimes increase the effort to breathe. Using HFNC at 30 L/min in hypercapnic COPD patients should be further evaluated. Trial registration Thai Clinical Trials Registry, TCTR20160902001. Registered 31 August 2016, http://www.clinicaltrials.in.th/index.php?tp=regtrials&menu=trialsearch&smenu=fulltext&task=search&task2=view1&id=2008.

Physiological effects of high-flow oxygen in tracheostomized patients

Background

High-flow oxygen therapy via nasal cannula (HFOT_NASAL) increases airway pressure, ameliorates oxygenation and reduces work of breathing. High-flow oxygen can be delivered through tracheostomy (HFOT_TRACHEAL), but its physiological effects have not been systematically described. We conducted a cross-over study to elucidate the effects of increasing flow rates of HFOT_TRACHEAL on gas exchange, respiratory rate and endotracheal pressure and to compare lower airway pressure produced by HFOT_NASAL and HFOT_TRACHEAL.

Methods

Twenty-six tracheostomized patients underwent standard oxygen therapy through a conventional heat and moisture exchanger, and then HFOT_TRACHEAL through a heated humidifier, with gas flow set at 10, 30 and 50 L/min. Each step lasted 30 min; gas flow sequence during HFOT_TRACHEAL was randomized. In five patients, measurements were repeated during HFOT_TRACHEAL before tracheostomy decannulation and immediately after during HFOT_NASAL. In each step, arterial blood gases, respiratory rate, and tracheal pressure were measured.

Results

During HFOT_TRACHEAL, PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio and tracheal expiratory pressure slightly increased proportionally to gas flow. The mean [95% confidence interval] expiratory pressure raise induced by 10-L/min increase in flow was 0.2 [0.1–0.2] cmH₂O (ρ = 0.77, p < 0.001). Compared to standard oxygen, HFOT_TRACHEAL limited the negative inspiratory swing in tracheal pressure; at 50 L/min, but not with other settings, HFOT_TRACHEAL increased mean tracheal expiratory pressure by (mean difference [95% CI]) 0.4 [0.3–0.6] cmH₂O, peak tracheal expiratory pressure by 0.4 [0.2–0.6] cmH₂O, improved PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio by 40 [8–71] mmHg, and reduced respiratory rate by 1.9 [0.3–3.6] breaths/min without PaCO₂ changes. As compared to HFOT_TRACHEAL, HFOT_NASAL produced higher tracheal mean and peak expiratory pressure (at 50 L/min, mean difference [95% CI]: 3 [1–5] cmH₂O and 4 [1–7] cmH₂O, respectively).

Conclusions

As compared to standard oxygen, 50 L/min of HFOT_TRACHEAL are needed to improve oxygenation, reduce respiratory rate and provide small degree of positive airway expiratory pressure, which, however, is significantly lower than the one produced by HFOT_NASAL.

High Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen vs. Conventional Oxygen Therapy and Noninvasive Ventilation in Emergency Department Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute respiratory failure (ARF) is a common cause of presentation to the Emergency Department (ED). High flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has been introduced as an alternative way to administer oxygen.

OBJECTIVES

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing HFNC with conventional oxygen therapy (COT) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) exclusively in the ED setting.

METHODS

Inclusion criteria were: RCTs on adults with ARF admitted to the ED, investigating HFNC vs. COT or other modes of ventilation. Trials that compared HFNC support outside the ED, were published as an abstract, or nonrandomized were excluded.

RESULTS

Four RCTs comparing HFNC with COT and one HFNC to NIV met the criteria. Overall, 775 patients were included. The meta-analysis of the studies comparing HFNC and COT showed no differences in intubation requirement, treatment failure, hospitalization, or mortality. Intolerance was significantly higher with HFNC (risk ratio 6.81 95% confidence interval 1.18-39.19; p = 0.03). In the only available RCT comparing HFNC with NIV, no difference was found for intubation rate, treatment failure, tolerance, and dyspnea.

CONCLUSIONS

We did not find any benefit of HFNC compared with COT and NIV in terms of intubation requirement, treatment failure, hospitalization, and mortality; COT was better tolerated.

Increasing support by nasal high flow acutely modifies the ROX index in hypoxemic patients: A physiologic study

The ROX (Respiratory rate-OXygenation) index is an early predictor of failure of nasal high flow (NHF), with lower values indicating higher risk of intubation. We measured the ROX index at set flow rate of 30 and 60 l/min in 57 hypoxemic patients on NHF. Patients with increased ROX index values at higher flow (n = 40) showed worse baseline oxygenation, higher respiratory rate and lower ROX index in comparison to patients with unchanged or decreased ROX index values (n = 17). The ROX index variation between flows was correlated with the change in end expiratory lung volume. Set flow rate during NHF might impact the ROX index value.

Clinical efficacy of high-flow nasal humidified oxygen therapy in patients with hypoxemia

To evaluate the effectiveness of high-flow nasal humidified oxygen (HFNHO) therapy in patients with mild hypoxemia after extubation. This study included 316 patients with mild hypoxemia after extubation from May 2016 to May 2018 from two intensive care units in China. Compare the effects of the Venturi Mask and High-Flow Nasal Humidified Oxygen (HFNHO) therapy on Heart Rate (HR), Respiratory Rate (RR), Oxygen Saturation (SpO₂), Oxygen Partial Pressure (PO₂), Partial Pressure Of Carbon Dioxide (PCO₂), Oxygenation Index (PO₂/FiO₂) after extubation, the use of noninvasive mechanical ventilation and tracheal intubation after treatment failure were observed and recorded. Patients have both lower HR and RR than those who received mask treatment (75.4±18.5 vs. 83.0±20.4, p = 0.0004; 18±6.5 vs. 23.6±10.3, p<0.001, respectively). There was significant difference between those who had HFNHO and mask administration’s SpO₂ and PO₂ (94.1±6.4 vs. 87.5±1.5, p<0.001; 88.16±2.9 vs. 77.3±2.3, p<0.001, respectively). For the HFNHO group, patients had lower PCO₂ with the mask group. (41.3±0.99 vs 42.2±1.2, p<0.001). On the other hand, the levels of PO₂/FiO₂ was significantly higher in the HFNHO Group, (181.0±8.3 vs. 157.2±4.9, p<0.05). We concluded HFNHO therapy could significantly relieve the symptoms of dyspnea, improve oxygenation, reduce the use of noninvasive mechanical ventilation and reduce the rate of secondary tracheal intubation in patients with mild hypoxemia after extubation.

Nasal high flow: physiology, efficacy and safety in the acute care setting, a narrative review

Nasal high flow (NHF) is a promising novel oxygen delivery device, whose mechanisms of action offer some beneficial effects over conventional oxygen systems. It is considered to have a number of physiological effects: it improves oxygenation, dynamic lung compliance, homogeneity and end expiratory lung volume; it decreases anatomical dead space and generates a positive airway pressure that can reduce respiratory rate, the work of breathing, and enhance patient comfort. NHF has been used as a prophylactic tool or as a treatment device mostly in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure such as pre-oxygenation before intubation, immunocompromised patients and acute heart failure. Moreover, there is some evidence that NHF could be used during procedural sedation. Finally, NHF was deemed to be effective in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with its positive end expiratory pressure effects and dead-space washout. However, careful monitoring is crucial to maximize NHF settings aimed at maximizing patient comfort while limiting the risk of delayed intubation. The present review presents the most updated evidence for NHF use in the adult acute care setting with the goal of providing clinicians with useful insights on the physiologic effects, main clinical indications, and safety issues of NHF treatment.

Patient self-inflicted lung injury: implications for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and ARDS patients on non-invasive support

The role of spontaneous breathing among patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and ARDS is debated: while avoidance of intubation with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) or high-flow nasal cannula improves clinical outcome, treatment failure worsens mortality. Recent data suggest patient self-inflicted lung injury (P-SILI) as a possible mechanism aggravating lung damage in these patients. P-SILI is generated by intense inspiratory effort yielding: (A) swings in transpulmonary pressure (i.e. lung stress) causing the inflation of big volumes in an aerated compartment markedly reduced by the disease-induced aeration loss; (B) abnormal increases in transvascular pressure, favouring negative-pressure pulmonary edema; (C) an intra-tidal shift of gas between different lung zones, generated by different transmission of muscular force (i.e. pendelluft); (D) diaphragm injury. Experimental data suggest that not all subjects are exposed to the development of P-SILI: patients with a PaO2/FiO2 ratio below 200 mmHg may represent the most at risk population. For them, current evidence indicates that high-flow nasal cannula alone may be superior to intermittent sessions of low-PEEP NIV delivered through face mask, while continuous high-PEEP helmet NIV likely promotes treatment success and may mitigate lung injury. The optimal initial noninvasive treatment of hypoxemic respiratory failure/ARDS remains however uncertain; high-flow nasal cannula and high-PEEP helmet NIV are promising tools to enhance success of the approach, but the best balance between these techniques has yet to be identified. During noninvasive support, careful clinical monitoring remains mandatory for prompt detection of treatment failure, in order not to delay intubation and protective ventilation.

Early nasal high-flow versus Venturi mask oxygen therapy after lung resection: a randomized trial

Background

Data on high-flow nasal oxygen after thoracic surgery are limited and confined to the comparison with low-flow oxygen. Different from low-flow oxygen, Venturi masks provide higher gas flow at a predetermined fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO₂). We conducted a randomized trial to determine whether preemptive high-flow nasal oxygen reduces the incidence of postoperative hypoxemia after lung resection, as compared to Venturi mask oxygen therapy.

Methods

In this single-center, randomized trial conducted in a teaching hospital in Italy, consecutive adult patients undergoing thoracotomic lung resection, who were not on long-term oxygen therapy, were randomly assigned to receive high-flow nasal or Venturi mask oxygen after extubation continuously for two postoperative days. The primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative hypoxemia (i.e., ratio of the partial pressure of arterial oxygen to FiO₂ (PaO₂/FiO₂) lower than 300 mmHg) within four postoperative days.

Results

Between September 2015 and April 2018, 96 patients were enrolled; 95 patients were analyzed (47 in high-flow group and 48 in Venturi mask group). In both groups, 38 patients (81% in the high-flow group and 79% in the Venturi mask group) developed postoperative hypoxemia, with an unadjusted odds ratio (OR) for the high-flow group of 1.11 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41–3] (p = 0.84). No inter-group differences were found in the degree of dyspnea nor in the proportion of patients needing oxygen therapy after treatment discontinuation (OR 1.34 [95% CI 0.60–3]), experiencing pulmonary complications (OR 1.29 [95% CI 0.51–3.25]) or requiring ventilatory support (OR 0.67 [95% CI 0.11–4.18]). Post hoc analyses revealed that PaO₂/FiO₂ during the study was not different between groups (p = 0.92), but patients receiving high-flow nasal oxygen had lower arterial pressure of carbon dioxide, with a mean inter-group difference of 2 mmHg [95% CI 0.5–3.4] (p = 0.009), and were burdened by a lower risk of postoperative hypercapnia (adjusted OR 0.18 [95% CI 0.06–0.54], p = 0.002).

Conclusions

When compared to Venturi mask after thoracotomic lung resection, preemptive high-flow nasal oxygen did not reduce the incidence of postoperative hypoxemia nor improved other analyzed outcomes. Further adequately powered investigations in this setting are warranted to establish whether high-flow nasal oxygen may yield clinical benefit on carbon dioxide clearance.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02544477. Registered 9 September 2015.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13054-019-2361-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

High flow nasal therapy in perioperative medicine: from operating room to general ward

BACKGROUND

High flow nasal therapy (HFNT) is a technique in which humidified and heated gas is delivered to the airways through the nose via small nasal prongs at flows that are higher than the rates generally applied during conventional oxygen therapy. The delivered high flow rates combine mixtures of air and oxygen and enable different inspired oxygen fractions ranging from 0.21 to 1. HFNT is increasingly used in critically ill adult patients, especially hypoxemic patients in different clinical settings.

MAIN BODY

Noninvasive ventilation delivers positive pressure (end-expiratory and inspiratory pressures or continuous positive airway pressure) via different external interfaces. In contrast, HFNT produces different physiological effects that are only partially linked to the generation of expiratory positive airway pressure. HFNT and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) are interesting non-invasive supports in perioperative medicine. HFNT exhibits some advantages compared to NIV because HFNT is easier to apply and requires a lower nursing workload. Tolerance of HFNT remains a matter of intense debate, and it may be related to selected parameters. Patients receiving HFNT and their respiratory patterns should be closely monitored to avoid delays in intubation despite correct oxygenation parameters.

CONCLUSION

HFNT seems to be an interesting noninvasive support in perioperative medicine. The present review provides anesthesiologists with an overview of current evidence and practical advice on the application of HFNT in perioperative medicine in adult patients.