Permissive hypoxaemia versus normoxaemia for mechanically ventilated critically ill patients

Oxygen therapy in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: guidelines from the SRLF-SFMU consensus conference

INTRODUCTION

Although largely used, the place of oxygen therapy and its devices in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (ARF) deserves to be clarified. The French Intensive Care Society (Société de Réanimation de Langue Française, SRLF) and the French Emergency Medicine Society (Société Française de Médecine d'Urgence, SFMU) organized a consensus conference on oxygen therapy in ARF (excluding acute cardiogenic pulmonary oedema and hypercapnic exacerbation of chronic obstructive diseases) in December 2023.

METHODS

A committee without any conflict of interest (CoI) with the subject defined 7 generic questions and drew up a list of sub questions according to the population, intervention, comparison and outcomes (PICO) model. An independent work group reviewed the literature using predefined keywords. The quality of the data was assessed using the GRADE methodology. Fifteen experts in the field from both societies proposed their own answers in a public session and answered questions from the jury (a panel of 16 critical-care and emergency medicine physicians, nurses and physiotherapists without any CoI) and the public. The jury then met alone for 48 h to write its recommendations.

RESULTS

The jury provided 22 statements answering 11 questions: in patients with ARF (1) What are the criteria for initiating oxygen therapy? (2) What are the targets of oxygen saturation? (3) What is the role of blood gas analysis? (4) When should an arterial catheter be inserted? (5) Should standard oxygen therapy, high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNC) or continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) be preferred? (6) What are the indications for non-invasive ventilation (NIV)? (7) What are the indications for invasive mechanical ventilation? (8) Should awake prone position be used? (9) What is the role of physiotherapy? (10) Which criteria necessarily lead to ICU admission? (11) Which oxygenation device should be preferred for patients for whom a do-not-intubate decision has been made?

CONCLUSION

These recommendations should optimize the use of oxygen during ARF.

Higher versus lower fractions of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to the intensive care unit

BACKGROUND

This is an updated review concerning 'Higher versus lower fractions of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to the intensive care unit'. Supplementary oxygen is provided to most patients in intensive care units (ICUs) to prevent global and organ hypoxia (inadequate oxygen levels). Oxygen has been administered liberally, resulting in high proportions of patients with hyperoxemia (exposure of tissues to abnormally high concentrations of oxygen). This has been associated with increased mortality and morbidity in some settings, but not in others. Thus far, only limited data have been available to inform clinical practice guidelines, and the optimum oxygenation target for ICU patients is uncertain. Because of the publication of new trial evidence, we have updated this review.

OBJECTIVES

To update the assessment of benefits and harms of higher versus lower fractions of inspired oxygen (FiO2) or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to the ICU.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, BIOSIS Previews, and LILACS. We searched for ongoing or unpublished trials in clinical trial registers and scanned the reference lists and citations of included trials. Literature searches for this updated review were conducted in November 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared higher versus lower FiO2 or targets of arterial oxygenation (partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), peripheral or arterial oxygen saturation (SpO2 or SaO2)) for adults admitted to the ICU. We included trials irrespective of publication type, publication status, and language. We excluded trials randomising participants to hypoxaemia (FiO2 below 0.21, SaO2/SpO2 below 80%, or PaO2 below 6 kPa) or to hyperbaric oxygen, and cross-over trials and quasi-randomised trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors independently, and in pairs, screened the references identified in the literature searches and extracted the data. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, the proportion of participants with one or more serious adverse events (SAEs), and quality of life. We analysed all outcomes at maximum follow-up. Only three trials reported the proportion of participants with one or more SAEs as a composite outcome. However, most trials reported on events categorised as SAEs according to the International Conference on Harmonisation Good Clinical Practice (ICH-GCP) criteria. We, therefore, conducted two analyses of the effect of higher versus lower oxygenation strategies using 1) the single SAE with the highest reported proportion in each trial, and 2) the cumulated proportion of participants with an SAE in each trial. Two trials reported on quality of life. Secondary outcomes were lung injury, myocardial infarction, stroke, and sepsis. No trial reported on lung injury as a composite outcome, but four trials reported on the occurrence of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and five on pneumonia. We, therefore, conducted two analyses of the effect of higher versus lower oxygenation strategies using 1) the single lung injury event with the highest reported proportion in each trial, and 2) the cumulated proportion of participants with ARDS or pneumonia in each trial. We assessed the risk of systematic errors by evaluating the risk of bias in the included trials using the Risk of Bias 2 tool. We used the GRADEpro tool to assess the overall certainty of the evidence. We also evaluated the risk of publication bias for outcomes reported by 10b or more trials.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 19 RCTs (10,385 participants), of which 17 reported relevant outcomes for this review (10,248 participants). For all-cause mortality, 10 trials were judged to be at overall low risk of bias, and six at overall high risk of bias. For the reported SAEs, 10 trials were judged to be at overall low risk of bias, and seven at overall high risk of bias. Two trials reported on quality of life, of which one was judged to be at overall low risk of bias and one at high risk of bias for this outcome. Meta-analysis of all trials, regardless of risk of bias, indicated no significant difference from higher or lower oxygenation strategies at maximum follow-up with regard to mortality (risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (C)I 0.96 to 1.06; I2 = 14%; 16 trials; 9408 participants; very low-certainty evidence); occurrence of SAEs: the highest proportion of any specific SAE in each trial RR 1.01 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.06; I2 = 36%; 9466 participants; 17 trials; very low-certainty evidence), or quality of life (mean difference (MD) 0.5 points in participants assigned to higher oxygenation strategies (95% CI -2.75 to 1.75; I2 = 34%, 1649 participants; 2 trials; very low-certainty evidence)). Meta-analysis of the cumulated number of SAEs suggested benefit of a lower oxygenation strategy (RR 1.04 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.07; I2 = 74%; 9489 participants; 17 trials; very low certainty evidence)). However, trial sequential analyses, with correction for sparse data and repetitive testing, could reject a relative risk increase or reduction of 10% for mortality and the highest proportion of SAEs, and 20% for both the cumulated number of SAEs and quality of life. Given the very low-certainty of evidence, it is necessary to interpret these findings with caution. Meta-analysis of all trials indicated no statistically significant evidence of a difference between higher or lower oxygenation strategies on the occurrence of lung injuries at maximum follow-up (the highest reported proportion of lung injury RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.38; I2 = 0%; 2048 participants; 8 trials; very low-certainty evidence). Meta-analysis of all trials indicated harm from higher oxygenation strategies as compared with lower on the occurrence of sepsis at maximum follow-up (RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.93; I2 = 0%; 752 participants; 3 trials; very low-certainty evidence). Meta-analysis indicated no differences regarding the occurrences of myocardial infarction or stroke.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In adult ICU patients, it is still not possible to draw clear conclusions about the effects of higher versus lower oxygenation strategies on all-cause mortality, SAEs, quality of life, lung injuries, myocardial infarction, stroke, and sepsis at maximum follow-up. This is due to low or very low-certainty evidence.

Conservative versus conventional oxygen therapy in type I acute respiratory failure patients in respiratory intensive care unit, Zagazig University

The present study aimed to assess the effect of a conservative (permissive hypoxemia) versus conventional (normoxia) protocol for oxygen supplementation on the outcome of type I respiratory failure patients admitted to respiratory intensive care unit (ICU). This randomized controlled clinical trial was carried out at the Respiratory ICU, Chest Department of Zagazig University Hospital, for 18 months, starting in July 2018. On admission, 56 enrolled patients with acute respiratory failure were randomized in a 1:1 ratio into the conventional group [oxygen therapy was supplied to maintain oxygen saturation (SpO2) between 94% and 97%] and the conservative group (oxygen therapy was administered to maintain SpO2 values between 88% and 92%). Different outcomes were assessed, including ICU mortality, the need for mechanical ventilation (MV) (invasive or non-invasive), and ICU length of stay. In the current study, the partial pressure of oxygen was significantly higher among the conventional group at all times after the baseline reading, and bicarbonate was significantly higher among the conventional group at the first two readings. There was no significant difference in serum lactate level in follow-up readings. The mean duration of MV and ICU length of stay was 6.17±2.05 and 9.25±2.22 days in the conventional group versus 6.46±2.0 and 9.53±2.16 days in the conservative group, respectively, without significant differences between both groups. About 21.4% of conventional group patients died, while 35.7% of conservative group patients died without a significant difference between both groups. We concluded that conservative oxygen therapy may be applied safely to patients with type I acute respiratory failure.

Pulmonary gas exchange evaluated by machine learning: a computer simulation

Using computer simulation we investigated whether machine learning (ML) analysis of selected ICU monitoring data can quantify pulmonary gas exchange in multi-compartment format. A 21 compartment ventilation/perfusion (V/Q) model of pulmonary blood flow processed 34,551 combinations of cardiac output, hemoglobin concentration, standard P50, base excess, VO₂ and VCO₂ plus three model-defining parameters: shunt, log SD and mean V/Q. From these inputs the model produced paired arterial blood gases, first with the inspired O₂ fraction (FiO₂) adjusted to arterial saturation (SaO₂) = 0.90, and second with FiO₂ increased by 0.1. 'Stacked regressor' ML ensembles were trained/validated on 90% of this dataset. The remainder with shunt, log SD, and mean 'held back' formed the test-set. 'Two-Point' ML estimates of shunt, log SD and mean utilized data from both FiO₂ settings. 'Single-Point' estimates used only data from SaO₂ = 0.90. From 3454 test gas exchange scenarios, two-point shunt, log SD and mean estimates produced linear regression models versus true values with slopes ~ 1.00, intercepts ~ 0.00 and R² ~ 1.00. Kernel density and Bland-Altman plots confirmed close agreement. Single-point estimates were less accurate: R² = 0.77-0.89, slope = 0.991-0.993, intercept = 0.009-0.334. ML applications using blood gas, indirect calorimetry, and cardiac output data can quantify pulmonary gas exchange in terms describing a 20 compartment V/Q model of pulmonary blood flow. High fidelity reports require data from two FiO₂ settings.

Effects of Acute Hypobaric Hypoxia Exposure on Cardiovascular Function in Unacclimatized Healthy Subjects: A "Rapid Ascent" Hypobaric Chamber Study

Background: This study aimed to observe the effects of a fast acute ascent to simulated high altitudes on cardiovascular function both in the main arteries and in peripheral circulation. Methods: We examined 17 healthy volunteers, between 18 and 50 years old, at sea level, at 3842 m of hypobaric hypoxia and after return to sea level. Cardiac output (CO) was measured with Doppler transthoracic echocardiography. Oxygen delivery was estimated as the product of CO and peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2). The brachial artery’s flow-mediated dilation (FMD) was measured with the ultrasound method. Post-occlusion reactive hyperemia (PORH) was assessed by digital plethysmography. Results: During altitude stay, peripheral oxygen saturation decreased (84.9 ± 4.2% of pre-ascent values; p < 0.001). None of the volunteers presented any hypoxia-related symptoms. Nevertheless, an increase in cardiac output (143.2 ± 36.2% of pre-ascent values, p < 0.001) and oxygen delivery index (120.6 ± 28.4% of pre-ascent values; p > 0.05) was observed. FMD decreased (97.3 ± 4.5% of pre-ascent values; p < 0.05) and PORH did not change throughout the whole experiment. Τhe observed changes disappeared after return to sea level, and normoxia re-ensued. Conclusions: Acute exposure to hypobaric hypoxia resulted in decreased oxygen saturation and increased compensatory heart rate, cardiac output and oxygen delivery. Pre-occlusion vascular diameters increase probably due to the reduction in systemic vascular resistance preventing flow-mediated dilation from increasing. Mean Arterial Pressure possibly decrease for the same reason without altering post-occlusive reactive hyperemia throughout the whole experiment, which shows that compensation mechanisms that increase oxygen delivery are effective.

German S3 Guideline: Oxygen Therapy in the Acute Care of Adult Patients

BACKGROUND

Oxygen (O2) is a drug with specific biochemical and physiological properties, a range of effective doses and may have side effects. In 2015, 14% of over 55,000 hospital patients in the UK were using oxygen. 42% of patients received this supplemental oxygen without a valid prescription. Health care professionals are frequently uncertain about the relevance of hypoxemia and have low awareness about the risks of hyperoxemia. Numerous randomized controlled trials about targets of oxygen therapy have been published in recent years. A national guideline is urgently needed.

METHODS

A national S3 guideline was developed and published within the Program for National Disease Management Guidelines (AWMF) with participation of 10 medical associations. A literature search was performed until February 1, 2021, to answer 10 key questions. The Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (CEBM) System ("The Oxford 2011 Levels of Evidence") was used to classify types of studies in terms of validity. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used for assessing the quality of evidence and for grading guideline recommendation, and a formal consensus-building process was performed.

RESULTS

The guideline includes 34 evidence-based recommendations about indications, prescription, monitoring and discontinuation of oxygen therapy in acute care. The main indication for O2 therapy is hypoxemia. In acute care both hypoxemia and hyperoxemia should be avoided. Hyperoxemia also seems to be associated with increased mortality, especially in patients with hypercapnia. The guideline provides recommended target oxygen saturation for acute medicine without differentiating between diagnoses. Target ranges for oxygen saturation are based depending on ventilation status risk for hypercapnia. The guideline provides an overview of available oxygen delivery systems and includes recommendations for their selection based on patient safety and comfort.

CONCLUSION

This is the first national guideline on the use of oxygen in acute care. It addresses health care professionals using oxygen in acute out-of-hospital and in-hospital settings.

Management of Adult Patients With Oxygen in the Acute Care Setting

Providing supplemental oxygen to hospitalized adults is a frequent practice and can be administered via a variety of devices. Oxygen therapy has evolved over the years, and clinicians should follow evidence-based practices to provide maximum benefit and avoid harm. This systematic review and subsequent clinical practice guidelines were developed to answer questions about oxygenation targets, monitoring, early initiation of high-flow oxygen (HFO), benefits of HFO compared to conventional oxygen therapy, and humidification of supplemental oxygen. Using a modification of the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method, 7 recommendations were developed to guide the delivery of supplemental oxygen to hospitalized adults: (1) aim for S_pO2 range of 94-98% for most hospitalized patients (88-92% for those with COPD), (2) the same S_pO2 range of 94-98% for critically ill patients, (3) promote early initiation of HFO, (4) consider HFO to avoid escalation to noninvasive ventilation, (5) consider HFO immediately postextubation to avoid re-intubation, (6) either HFO or conventional oxygen therapy may be used with patients who are immunocompromised, and (7) consider humidification for supplemental oxygen when flows > 4 L/min are used.

Association Between Hyperoxia, Supplemental Oxygen, and Mortality in Critically Injured Patients

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

OBJECTIVES:

Hyperoxia is common among critically ill patients and may increase morbidity and mortality. However, limited evidence exists for critically injured patients. The objective of this study was to determine the association between hyperoxia and in-hospital mortality in adult trauma patients requiring ICU admission.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:

This multicenter, retrospective cohort study was conducted at two level I trauma centers and one level II trauma center in CO between October 2015 and June 2018. All adult trauma patients requiring ICU admission within 24 hours of emergency department arrival were eligible. The primary exposure was oxygenation during the first 7 days of hospitalization.

INTERVENTIONS:

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:

Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were hospital-free days and ventilator-free days. We included 3,464 critically injured patients with a mean age of 52.6 years. Sixty-five percent were male, and 66% had blunt trauma mechanism of injury. The primary outcome of in-hospital mortality occurred in 264 patients (7.6%). Of 226,057 patient-hours, 46% were spent in hyperoxia (oxygen saturation > 96%) and 52% in normoxia (oxygen saturation 90–96%). During periods of hyperoxia, the adjusted risk for mortality was higher with greater oxygen administration. At oxygen saturation of 100%, the adjusted risk scores for mortality (95% CI) at Fio₂ of 100%, 80%, 60%, and 50% were 6.4 (3.5–11.8), 5.4 (3.4–8.6), 2.7 (1.7–4.1), and 1.5 (1.1–2.2), respectively. At oxygen saturation of 98%, the adjusted risk scores for mortality (95% CI) at Fio₂ of 100%, 80%, 60%, and 50% were 7.7 (4.3–13.5), 6.3 (4.1–9.7), 3.2 (2.2–4.8), and 1.9 (1.4–2.7), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS:

During hyperoxia, higher oxygen administration was independently associated with a greater risk of mortality among critically injured patients. Level of evidence: Cohort study, level III.

Conservative management of COVID-19 associated hypoxaemia

This correspondence argues that data presented previously cannot justify a novel approach for treating hypoxic patients with severe #COVID19 https://bit.ly/3dLaPlk.

Higher versus lower fraction of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to the intensive care unit

BACKGROUND

The mainstay treatment for hypoxaemia is oxygen therapy, which is given to the vast majority of adults admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). The practice of oxygen administration has been liberal, which may result in hyperoxaemia. Some studies have indicated an association between hyperoxaemia and mortality, whilst other studies have not. The ideal target for supplemental oxygen for adults admitted to the ICU is uncertain. Despite a lack of robust evidence of effectiveness, oxygen administration is widely recommended in international clinical practice guidelines. The potential benefit of supplemental oxygen must be weighed against the potentially harmful effects of hyperoxaemia.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of higher versus lower fraction of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to the ICU.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified trials through electronic searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, BIOSIS Previews, CINAHL, and LILACS. We searched for ongoing or unpublished trials in clinical trials registers. We also scanned the reference lists of included studies. We ran the searches in December 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared higher versus lower fraction of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to the ICU. We included trials irrespective of publication type, publication status, and language. We included trials with a difference between the intervention and control groups of a minimum 1 kPa in partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO2), minimum 10% in fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2), or minimum 2% in arterial oxygen saturation of haemoglobin/non-invasive peripheral oxygen saturation (SaO2/SpO2). We excluded trials randomizing participants to hypoxaemia (FiO2 below 0.21, SaO2/SpO2 below 80%, and PaO2 below 6 kPa) and to hyperbaric oxygen.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently, and in pairs, screened the references retrieved in the literature searches and extracted data. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, the proportion of participants with one or more serious adverse events, and quality of life. None of the trials reported the proportion of participants with one or more serious adverse events according to the International Conference on Harmonisation Good Clinical Practice (ICH-GCP) criteria. Nonetheless, most trials reported several serious adverse events. We therefore included an analysis of the effect of higher versus lower fraction of inspired oxygen, or targets using the highest reported proportion of participants with a serious adverse event in each trial. Our secondary outcomes were lung injury, acute myocardial infarction, stroke, and sepsis. None of the trials reported on lung injury as a composite outcome, however some trials reported on acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and pneumonia. We included an analysis of the effect of higher versus lower fraction of inspired oxygen or targets using the highest reported proportion of participants with ARDS or pneumonia in each trial. To assess the risk of systematic errors, we evaluated the risk of bias of the included trials. We used GRADE to assess the overall certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 RCTs (1458 participants), seven of which reported relevant outcomes for this review (1285 participants). All included trials had an overall high risk of bias, whilst two trials had a low risk of bias for all domains except blinding of participants and personnel. Meta-analysis indicated harm from higher fraction of inspired oxygen or targets as compared with lower fraction or targets of arterial oxygenation regarding mortality at the time point closest to three months (risk ratio (RR) 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01 to 1.37; I2 = 0%; 4 trials; 1135 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Meta-analysis indicated harm from higher fraction of inspired oxygen or targets as compared with lower fraction or targets of arterial oxygenation regarding serious adverse events at the time point closest to three months (estimated highest proportion of specific serious adverse events in each trial RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.23; I2 = 0%; 1234 participants; 6 trials; very low-certainty evidence). These findings should be interpreted with caution given that they are based on very low-certainty evidence. None of the included trials reported any data on quality of life at any time point. Meta-analysis indicated no evidence of a difference between higher fraction of inspired oxygen or targets as compared with lower fraction or targets of arterial oxygenation on lung injury at the time point closest to three months (estimated highest reported proportion of lung injury RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.36; I2 = 0%; 1167 participants; 5 trials; very low-certainty evidence). None of the included trials reported any data on acute myocardial infarction or stroke, and only one trial reported data on the effects on sepsis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are very uncertain about the effects of higher versus lower fraction of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to the ICU on all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, and lung injuries at the time point closest to three months due to very low-certainty evidence. Our results indicate that oxygen supplementation with higher versus lower fractions or oxygenation targets may increase mortality. None of the trials reported the proportion of participants with one or more serious adverse events according to the ICH-GCP criteria, however we found that the trials reported an increase in the number of serious adverse events with higher fractions or oxygenation targets. The effects on quality of life, acute myocardial infarction, stroke, and sepsis are unknown due to insufficient data.

Comparison of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation outcome for influenza-associated acute respiratory failure in Japan between 2009 and 2016

Background

Since the 2009 pandemic influenza, we have nationally established a committee of the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) project. This project involves adequate respiratory management for severe respiratory failure using ECMO. This study aimed to investigate the correlations between changes in respiratory management using ECMO in Japan and outcomes of patients with influenza-associated acute respiratory failure between 2009 and 2016.

Methods

We investigated the incidence, severity, characteristics, and prognosis of influenza-associated acute respiratory failure in 2016 by web-based surveillance. The correlations between clinical characteristics, ventilator settings, ECMO settings, and prognosis were evaluated.

Results

A total of 14 patients were managed with ECMO in 2016. There were no significant differences in age, sex, and the acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II score between 2009 and 2016. The maximum sequential organ failure assessment score and highest positive end-expiratory pressure were lower in 2016 than in 2009 (p = 0.03 and p = 0.015, respectively). Baseline and lowest partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO₂)/fraction of inspiratory oxygen (F_IO₂) ratios were higher in 2016 than in 2009 (p = 0.009 and p = 0.002, respectively). The types of consoles, circuits, oxygenators, centrifugal pumps, and cannulas were significantly changed between 2016 and 2009 (p = 0.006, p = 0.003, p = 0.004, p < 0.001, respectively). Duration of the use of each circuit was significantly longer in 2016 than in 2009 (8.5 vs. 4.0 days; p = 0.0001). Multivariate analysis showed that the use of ECMO in 2016 was an independent predictor of better overall survival in patients with influenza-associated acute respiratory failure (hazard ratio, 7.25; 95% confidence interval, 1.35–33.3; p = 0.021).

Conclusions

Respiratory management for influenza-associated acute respiratory failure using ECMO was significantly changed in 2016 compared with 2009 in Japan. The outcome of ECMO use had improved in 2016 compared with the outcome in 2009 in patients with influenza-associated acute respiratory failure.

Children's Oxygen Administration Strategies Trial (COAST): A randomised controlled trial of high flow versus oxygen versus control in African children with severe pneumonia

Background: In Africa, the clinical syndrome of pneumonia remains the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in children in the post-neonatal period. This represents a significant burden on in-patient services. The targeted use of oxygen and simple, non-invasive methods of respiratory support may be a highly cost-effective means of improving outcome, but the optimal oxygen saturation threshold that results in benefit and the best strategy for delivery are yet to be tested in adequately powered randomised controlled trials. There is, however, an accumulating literature about the harms of oxygen therapy across a range of acute and emergency situations that have stimulated a number of trials investigating permissive hypoxia. Methods: In 4200 African children, aged 2 months to 12 years, presenting to 5 hospitals in East Africa with respiratory distress and hypoxia (oxygen saturation < 92%), the COAST trial will simultaneously evaluate two related interventions (targeted use of oxygen with respect to the optimal oxygen saturation threshold for treatment and mode of delivery) to reduce shorter-term mortality at 48-hours (primary endpoint), and longer-term morbidity and mortality to 28 days in a fractional factorial design, that compares: Liberal oxygenation (recommended care) compared with a strategy that permits hypoxia to SpO 2 > or = 80% (permissive hypoxia); andHigh flow using AIrVO 2 TM compared with low flow delivery (routine care). Discussion: The overarching objective is to address the key research gaps in the therapeutic use of oxygen in resource-limited setting in order to provide a better evidence base for future management guidelines. The trial has been designed to address the poor outcomes of children in sub-Saharan Africa, which are associated with high rates of in-hospital mortality, 9-10% (for those with oxygen saturations of 80-92%) and 26-30% case fatality for those with oxygen saturations <80%. Clinical trial registration: ISRCTN15622505 Trial status: Recruiting.

Children's Oxygen Administration Strategies Trial (COAST): A randomised controlled trial of high flow versus oxygen versus control in African children with severe pneumonia

Background: In Africa, the clinical syndrome of pneumonia remains the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in children in the post-neonatal period. This represents a significant burden on in-patient services. The targeted use of oxygen and simple, non-invasive methods of respiratory support may be a highly cost-effective means of improving outcome, but the optimal oxygen saturation threshold that results in benefit and the best strategy for delivery are yet to be tested in adequately powered randomised controlled trials. There is, however, an accumulating literature about the harms of oxygen therapy across a range of acute and emergency situations that have stimulated a number of trials investigating permissive hypoxia. Methods: In 4200 African children, aged 2 months to 12 years, presenting to 5 hospitals in East Africa with respiratory distress and hypoxia (oxygen saturation < 92%), the COAST trial will simultaneously evaluate two related interventions (targeted use of oxygen with respect to the optimal oxygen saturation threshold for treatment and mode of delivery) to reduce shorter-term mortality at 48-hours (primary endpoint), and longer-term morbidity and mortality to 28 days in a fractional factorial design, that compares: Liberal oxygenation (recommended care) compared with a strategy that permits hypoxia to SpO 2 > or = 80% (permissive hypoxia); andHigh flow using AIrVO 2TM compared with low flow delivery (routine care). Discussion: The overarching objective is to address the key research gaps in the therapeutic use of oxygen in resource-limited setting in order to provide a better evidence base for future management guidelines. The trial has been designed to address the poor outcomes of children in sub-Saharan Africa, which are associated with high rates of in-hospital mortality, 9-10% (for those with oxygen saturations of 80-92%) and 26-30% case fatality for those with oxygen saturations <80%. Clinical trial registration: ISRCTN15622505 Trial status: Recruiting.

Patient Safety: Identifying and Managing Complications of Mechanical Ventilation

Mechanical ventilation is a fundamental aspect of critical care practice to help meet the respiratory needs of critically ill patients. Complications can occur though, as a direct result of being mechanically ventilated, or indirectly because of a secondary process. Preventing, identifying, and managing these complications significantly contribute to the role and responsibilities of critical care nurses in promoting patient safety. This article reviews common ventilator-associated events, including both infectious (eg, ventilator-associated pneumonia) and noninfectious causes (eg, acute respiratory distress syndrome, pulmonary edema, pleural effusion, and atelectasis).

The standard of care of patients with ARDS: ventilatory settings and rescue therapies for refractory hypoxemia

Purpose

Severe ARDS is often associated with refractory hypoxemia, and early identification and treatment of hypoxemia is mandatory. For the management of severe ARDS ventilator settings, positioning therapy, infection control, and supportive measures are essential to improve survival.

Methods and results

A precise definition of life-threating hypoxemia is not identified. Typical clinical determinations are: arterial partial pressure of oxygen < 60 mmHg and/or arterial oxygenation < 88 % and/or the ratio of PaO₂/FIO₂ < 100. For mechanical ventilation specific settings are recommended: limitation of tidal volume (6 ml/kg predicted body weight), adequate high PEEP (>12 cmH₂O), a recruitment manoeuvre in special situations, and a ‘balanced’ respiratory rate (20-30/min). Individual bedside methods to guide PEEP/recruitment (e.g., transpulmonary pressure) are not (yet) available. Prone positioning [early (≤ 48 hrs after onset of severe ARDS) and prolonged (repetition of 16-hr-sessions)] improves survival. An advanced infection management/control includes early diagnosis of bacterial, atypical, viral and fungal specimen (blood culture, bronchoalveolar lavage), and of infection sources by CT scan, followed by administration of broad-spectrum anti-infectives. Neuromuscular blockage (Cisatracurium ≤ 48 hrs after onset of ARDS), as well as an adequate sedation strategy (score guided) is an important supportive therapy. A negative fluid balance is associated with improved lung function and the use of hemofiltration might be indicated for specific indications.

Conclusions

A specific standard of care is required for the management of severe ARDS with refractory hypoxemia.

Self-reported attitudes versus actual practice of oxygen therapy by ICU physicians and nurses

BACKGROUND

High inspiratory oxygen concentrations are frequently administered in ventilated patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) but may induce lung injury and systemic toxicity. We compared beliefs and actual clinical practice regarding oxygen therapy in critically ill patients.

METHODS

In three large teaching hospitals in the Netherlands, ICU physicians and nurses were invited to complete a questionnaire about oxygen therapy. Furthermore, arterial blood gas (ABG) analysis data and ventilator settings were retrieved to assess actual oxygen practice in the same hospitals 1 year prior to the survey.

RESULTS

In total, 59% of the 215 respondents believed that oxygen-induced lung injury is a concern. The majority of physicians and nurses stated that minimal acceptable oxygen saturation and partial arterial oxygen pressure (PaO2) ranges were 85% to 95% and 7 to 10 kPa (52.5 to 75 mmHg), respectively. Analysis of 107,888 ABG results with concurrent ventilator settings, derived from 5,565 patient admissions, showed a median (interquartile range (IQR)) PaO2 of 11.7 kPa (9.9 to 14.3) [87.8 mmHg], median fractions of inspired oxygen (FiO2) of 0.4 (0.4 to 0.5), and median positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) of 5 (5 to 8) cm H2O. Of all PaO2 values, 73% were higher than the upper limit of the commonly self-reported acceptable range, and in 58% of these cases, neither FiO2 nor PEEP levels were lowered until the next ABG sample was taken.

CONCLUSIONS

Most ICU clinicians acknowledge the potential adverse effects of prolonged exposure to hyperoxia and report a low tolerance for high oxygen levels. However, in actual clinical practice, a large proportion of their ICU patients was exposed to higher arterial oxygen levels than self-reported target ranges.