High-flow oxygen therapy in immunocompromised patients with acute respiratory failure: A review and meta-analysis

Efficacy of high-flow nasal oxygen therapy started in the emergency room versus conventional oxygen therapy in patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory distress: protocol for a French multicentric, prospective, open and randomised superiority study protocol (HIFLOWED)

INTRODUCTION

Acute respiratory failure is a life-threatening condition frequently found in the emergency department. High-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) is increasingly used in emergency departments for patients with hypoxaemic acute respiratory failure. However, despite the increasing number of studies, its potential advantages regarding the need for therapeutic escalation and mortality have not been precisely evaluated. Our objective is to compare conventional oxygen therapy to HFNO when they are initiated during the first hour following the patient's arrival at the emergency department, with the hypothesis that HFNO would reduce the need for ventilatory therapy escalation.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a multicentric, prospective, open and randomised superiority study. 500 inpatients will be randomised (1:1) to receive conventional oxygen therapy or HNFO. The primary outcome is a failure in the oxygen therapy defined as the need for a therapeutic escalation within 4 hours after therapy initiation.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been submitted and approved by the Comité de Protection des Personnes Nord Ouest IV (20 October 2020). As required, a notification was sent to the Agence nationale de sécurité du médicament et des produits de santé (22 October 2020). The research results will be published in peer-reviewed publications and presented at international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04607967.

Modified Respiratory Rate Oxygenation Index: An Early Warning Index for the Need of Intubation in COVID-19 Patients with High-Flow Nasal Cannula Therapy

BACKGROUND

High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNC) is recommended for patients with COVID-19. However, the increasing use of HFNC brings a risk of delayed intubation. The optimal timing of switching from HFNC to invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) remains unclear. An effective predictor is needed to assist in deciding on the timing of intubation. Respiratory rate and oxygenation (ROX) index, defined as (SpO2/FiO2) / respiratory rate, has already shown good diagnostic accuracy. Modified ROX (mROX) index, defined as (PaO2 /FiO2) / respiratory rate, might be better than the ROX index in predicting HFNC failure.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to evaluate the predictive value of mROX for HFNC failure in patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

Severe or critical patients with COVID-19 treated with HFNC were enrolled in two clinical centers. Laboratory indicators, respiratory parameters, and mROX index at 0 h and 2 h after initial HFNC were collected. Based on the need for IMV after HFNC initiation, the patients were divided into an HFNC failure group and an HFNC success group. The predictive value of mROX index for IMV was evaluated by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and logistic regression analysis. We performed Kaplan-Meier survival analysis using the log-rank test.

RESULTS

Sixty patients with COVID-19 (mean ± SD age, 62.8 ± 14.1 years; 42 patients were male) receiving HFNC were evaluated, including 18 critical and 42 severe cases. A total of 33 patients had hypertension; 14 had diabetes; 17 had chronic cardiac disease; 11 had chronic lung disease; 13 had chronic kidney disease; and 17 had a history of stroke. The AUROC of mROX index at 2 h was superior to that of other respiratory parameters to predict the need for IMV (0.959; p < 0.001). At the mROX index cutoff point of 4.45, predicting HFNC failure reached the optimal threshold, with specificity of 94% and sensitivity of 92%. Logistic regression analysis showed that 2-h mROX index < 4.45 was a protective factor for IMV (odd radio 0.18; 95% CI 0.05-0.64; p = 0.008). In the HFNC failure group, the median time from HFNC to IMV was 22.5 h. The 28-day mortality of the late intubation patients (≥ 22.5 h) was higher than that of the early intubation patients (< 22.5 h) (53.8% vs. 8.3%; p = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

mROX at 2 h is a good early warning index of the need for IMV in patients with COVID-19 after HFNC initiation. Early intubation may lead to better survival in patients with 2-h mROX index < 4.45.

High-flow nasal cannula oxygen in patients with haematological malignancy: a retrospective observational study

Patients with haematological malignancies (HM) face high rates of intensive care unit (ICU) admission and mortality. High-flow nasal cannula oxygen (HFNCO) is increasingly used to support HM patients in ward settings, but there is limited evidence on the safety and efficacy of HFNCO in this group. We retrospectively reviewed all HM patients receiving ward-based HFNCO, supervised by a critical care outreach service (CCOS), from January 2014 to January 2019. We included 130 consecutive patients. Forty-three (33.1%) were weaned off HFNCO without ICU admission. Eighty-seven (66.9%) were admitted to ICU, 20 (23.3%) required non-invasive and 34 (39.5%) invasive mechanical ventilation. ICU and hospital mortality were 42% and 55% respectively. Initial FiO₂ < 0.4 (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.09-0.81, p = 0.019) and HFNCO use on the ward > 1 day (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.04, 0.59, p = 0.006) were associated with reduced likelihood for ICU admission. Invasive ventilation was associated with reduced survival (OR 0.27, 95%CI 0.1-0.7, p = 0.007). No significant adverse events were reported. HM patients receiving ward-based HFNCO have higher rates of ICU admission, but comparable hospital mortality to those requiring CCOS review without respiratory support. Results should be interpreted cautiously, as the model proposed depends on the existence of CCOS.

Analysis of risk factors for the failure of respiratory support with high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy in children with acute respiratory dysfunction: A case-control study

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines regarding high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) use for respiratory support in critically ill children are lacking. Therefore, we aimed to determine the risk factors for early HFNC failure to reduce the failure rate and prevent adverse consequences of HFNC failure in children with acute respiratory dysfunction.

METHODS

Demographic and laboratory data were compared among patients, admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit between January 2017 and December 2018, who were included in a retrospective cohort study. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine risk factors for eventual entry into the predictive model for early HFNC failure and to perform an external validation study in a prospective observational cohort study from January to February 2019. Further, the association of clinical indices and trends pre- and post-treatment with HFNC treatment success or failure in these patients was dynamically observed.

RESULTS

In total, 348 pediatric patients were included, of these 282 (81.0%) were included in the retrospective cohort study; HFNC success was observed in 182 patients (64.5%), HFNC 0-24 h failure in 74 patients (26.2%), and HFNC 24-48 h failure in 26 patients (9.2%). HFNC 24 h failure was significantly associated with the pediatric risk of mortality (PRISM) III score [odds ratio, 1.391; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.249-1.550], arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide-to-arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaCO₂/PaO₂) ratio (odds ratio, 38.397; 95% CI: 6.410-230.013), and respiratory rate-oxygenation (ROX) index (odds ratio, 0.751; 95% CI: 0.616-0.915). The discriminating cutoff point for the new scoring system based on the three risk factors for HFNC 24 h failure was ≥ 2.0 points, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.794 (95% CI, 0.729-0.859, P < 0.001), sensitivity of 68%, and specificity of 79%; similar values were noted on applying the model to the prospective observational cohort comprising 66 patients (AUC = 0.717, 95% CI, 0.675-0.758, sensitivity 83%, specificity 44%, P = 0.009). In this prospective cohort, 11 patients with HFNC failure had an upward trend in PaCO₂/PaO₂ ratio and downward trends in respiratory failure index (P/F ratio) and ROX index; however, opposite directions of change were observed in 55 patients with HFNC success. Furthermore, the fractional changes (FCs) in PaCO₂/PaO₂ ratio, P/F ratio, percutaneous oxygen saturation-to-fraction of inspired oxygen (S/F) ratio, and ROX index at 2 h post-HFNC therapy onset were statistically significant between the two groups (all, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In the pediatric patients with acute respiratory insufficiency, pre-treatment PRISM III score, PaCO₂/PaO₂ ratio, and ROX index were risk factors for HFNC 24 h failure, and the direction and magnitude of changes in the PaCO₂/PaO₂ ratio, P/F ratio, and ROX index before and 2 h after HFNC treatment were warning indicators for HFNC 24 h failure. Further close monitoring should be considered for patients with these conditions.

High Flow Nasal Cannula as Support in Immunocompromised Patients with Acute Respiratory Failure: A Retrospective Study

Introduction:

High Flow Nasal Cannula (HFNC) is a novel technique for respiratory support that improves oxygenation. In some patients, it may reduce the work of breathing. In immunocompromised patients with Acute Respiratory Failure (ARF), Non-Invasive Ventilation (NIV) is the main support recommended strategy, since invasive mechanical ventilation could increase mortality rates. NIV used for more than 48 hours may be associated with increased in-hospital mortality and hospital length of stay. Therefore HFNC seems like a respiratory support alternative.

Objective:

To describe clinical outcomes of immunocompromised patients with ARF HFNC-supported.

Methods:

Retrospective study in patients admitted with ARF and HFNC-supported. 25 adult patients were included, 21 pharmacologically and 4 non- pharmacologically immunosuppressed. Median age of the patients was 64 [60-76] years, APACHE II 15 [11-19], and PaO2:FiO2 218 [165-248]. Demographic information, origin of immunosuppression, Respiratory Rate (RR), Heart Rate (HR), Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP), oxygen saturation (SpO2) and PaO2:FiO2 ratio were extracted from clinical records of our HFNC local protocol. Data acquisition was performed before and after the first 24 hours of connection. In addition, the need for greater ventilatory support after HFNC, orotracheal intubation, in-hospital mortality and 90 days out-patients’ mortality was recorded.

Results:

Mean RR before the connection was 25±22 breaths/min and 22±4 breaths/min after the first 24 hours of HFNC use (95% CI; p=0.02). HR mean before connection to HFNC was 96±22 beats/min, and after, it was 86±15 beats/min (95%CI; p=0.008). Previous mean MAP was 86±15 mmHg, and after HFNC, it was 80±12 mmHg (95%CI; p=0.09); mean SpO2 after was 93±5% and before it was 95±4% (95% CI; p=0.13); and previous PaO2:FiO2 mean was 219±66, and after it was 324±110 (95%CI; p=0.52). In-hospital mortality was 28% and 90 days out-patients’ mortality was 32%.

Conclusion:

HFNC in immunosuppressed ARF subjects significantly decreases HR and RR, being apparently an effective alternative to decrease work of breathing. In-hospital mortality in ARF immunosuppressed patients was high even though respiratory support was used. Better studies are needed to define the role of HFNC-support in ARF.

Effectiveness and Harms of High-Flow Nasal Oxygen for Acute Respiratory Failure: An Evidence Report for a Clinical Guideline From the American College of Physicians

BACKGROUND

Use of high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) for treatment of adults with acute respiratory failure (ARF) has increased.

PURPOSE

To assess HFNO versus noninvasive ventilation (NIV) or conventional oxygen therapy (COT) for ARF in hospitalized adults.

DATA SOURCES

English-language searches of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library from January 2000 to July 2020; systematic review reference lists.

STUDY SELECTION

29 randomized controlled trials evaluated HFNO versus NIV (k = 11) or COT (k = 21).

DATA EXTRACTION

Data extraction by a single investigator was verified by a second, 2 investigators assessed risk of bias, and evidence certainty was determined by consensus.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Results are reported separately for HFNO versus NIV, for HFNO versus COT, and by initial or postextubation management. Compared with NIV, HFNO may reduce all-cause mortality, intubation, and hospital-acquired pneumonia and improve patient comfort in initial ARF management (low-certainty evidence) but not in postextubation management. Compared with COT, HFNO may reduce reintubation and improve patient comfort in postextubation ARF management (low-certainty evidence).

LIMITATIONS

Trials varied in populations enrolled, ARF causes, and treatment protocols. Trial design, sample size, duration of treatment and follow-up, and results reporting were often insufficient to adequately assess many outcomes. Protocols, clinician and health system training, cost, and resource use were poorly characterized.

CONCLUSION

Compared with NIV, HFNO as initial ARF management may improve several clinical outcomes. Compared with COT, HFNO as postextubation management may reduce reintubations and improve patient comfort; HFNO resulted in fewer harms than NIV or COT. Broad applicability, including required clinician and health system experience and resource use, is not well known.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

American College of Physicians. (PROSPERO: CRD42019146691).

Emergency tracheal intubation in 202 patients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: lessons learnt and international expert recommendations

Tracheal intubation in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients creates a risk to physiologically compromised patients and to attending healthcare providers. Clinical information on airway management and expert recommendations in these patients are urgently needed. By analysing a two-centre retrospective observational case series from Wuhan, China, a panel of international airway management experts discussed the results and formulated consensus recommendations for the management of tracheal intubation in COVID-19 patients. Of 202 COVID-19 patients undergoing emergency tracheal intubation, most were males (n=136; 67.3%) and aged 65 yr or more (n=128; 63.4%). Most patients (n=152; 75.2%) were hypoxaemic (Sao₂ <90%) before intubation. Personal protective equipment was worn by all intubating healthcare workers. Rapid sequence induction (RSI) or modified RSI was used with an intubation success rate of 89.1% on the first attempt and 100% overall. Hypoxaemia (Sao₂ <90%) was common during intubation (n=148; 73.3%). Hypotension (arterial pressure <90/60 mm Hg) occurred in 36 (17.8%) patients during and 45 (22.3%) after intubation with cardiac arrest in four (2.0%). Pneumothorax occurred in 12 (5.9%) patients and death within 24 h in 21 (10.4%). Up to 14 days post-procedure, there was no evidence of cross infection in the anaesthesiologists who intubated the COVID-19 patients. Based on clinical information and expert recommendation, we propose detailed planning, strategy, and methods for tracheal intubation in COVID-19 patients.

Early prediction of high flow nasal cannula therapy outcomes using a modified ROX index incorporating heart rate

Background

The ROX index (ratio of pulse oximetry/FIO₂ to respiratory rate) has been validated to predict high flow nasal cannula therapy (HFNC) outcomes in patients with pneumonia. We evaluated a modified ROX index incorporating heart rate (HR) in patients initiated on HFNC for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and as a preventative treatment following planned extubation.

Methods

We performed a prospective observational cohort study of 145 patients treated with HFNC. ROX-HR index was defined as the ratio of ROX index over HR (beats/min), multiplied by a factor of 100. Evaluation was performed using area under the receiving operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and cutoffs assessed for prediction of HFNC failure: defined as the need for mechanical ventilation.

Results

Ninety-nine (68.3%) and 46 (31.7%) patients were initiated on HFNC for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and following a planned extubation, respectively. The majority (86.9%) of patients had pneumonia as a primary diagnosis, and 85 (56.6%) patients were immunocompromised. Sixty-one (42.1%) patients required intubation (HFNC failure). Amongst patients on HFNC for acute respiratory failure, HFNC failure was associated with a lower ROX and ROX-HR index recorded at time points between 1 and 48 h. Within the first 12 h, both indices performed with the highest AUROC at 10 h as follows: 0.723 (95% CI 0.605–0.840) and 0.739 (95% CI 0.626–0.853) for the ROX and ROX-HR index respectively. A ROX-HR index of > 6.80 was significantly associated with a lower risk of HFNC failure (hazard ratio 0.301 (95% CI 0.143–0.663)) at 10 h. This association was also observed at 2, 6, 18, and 24h, even with correction for potential confounding factors. For HFNC initiated post-extubation, only the ROX-HR index remained significantly associated with HFNC failure at all recorded time points between 1 and 24 h. A ROX-HR > 8.00 at 10 h was significantly associated with a lower risk of HFNC failure (hazard ratio 0.176 (95% CI 0.051–0.604)).

Conclusion

While validation studies are required, the ROX-HR index appears to be a promising tool for early identification of treatment failure in patients initiated on HFNC for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure or as a preventative treatment after a planned extubation.

Use of High-Flow Nasal Cannula for Immunocompromise and Acute Respiratory Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute respiratory failure (ARF) is a common cause of emergency department (ED) and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions. High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNC) is widely used for patients with ARF.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to evaluate the latest evidence regarding the application of HFNC in immunocompromised patients with ARF.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases from inception to January 2019. The primary outcome was short-term mortality and the secondary outcomes were intubation rate and length of ICU stay.

RESULTS

Eight studies involving 2,179 immunocompromised subjects with ARF were included. No significant differences for short-term mortality were observed when comparing HFNC with conventional oxygen therapy (COT) (risk ratio [RR] 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73 to 1.09; p = 0.25, I² = 47%) and with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) (RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.37 to 1.18; p = 0.16, I² = 58%). Lower intubation rates were found when comparing HFNC with COT (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.80 to 0.99; p = 0.03, I² = 0%) and no significant difference was found between HFNC and NIV (RR 0.74; 95% CI 0.46 to 1.19; p = 0.22, I² = 67%). The length of ICU stay was similar when comparing HFNC with COT (mean difference [MD] 0.59; 95% CI -1.68 to 2.85; p = 0.61, I² = 56%), but was significantly shorter when HFNC was compared with NIV (MD -2.13; 95% CI -3.98 to -0.29; p = 0.02, I² = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference in short-term mortality with use of HFNC when compared with COT or NIV for immunocompromised patients with ARF. A lower intubation rate than COT and a shorter length of ICU stay than NIV were observed in the HFNC group.

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.

ERS International Congress, Madrid, 2019: highlights from the Respiratory Intensive Care Assembly

The Respiratory Intensive Care Assembly of the European Respiratory Society is delighted to present the highlights from the 2019 International Congress in Madrid, Spain. We have selected four sessions that discussed recent advances in a wide range of topics: from acute respiratory failure to cough augmentation in neuromuscular disorders and from extra-corporeal life support to difficult ventilator weaning. The subjects are summarised by early career members in close collaboration with the Assembly leadership. We aim to give the reader an update on the most important developments discussed at the conference. Each session is further summarised into a short list of take-home messages.

The Impact of High-Flow Nasal Cannula on the Outcome of Immunocompromised Patients with Acute Respiratory Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background and objectives: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) can be used as a respiratory support strategy for patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF). However, no clear evidence exists to support or oppose HFNC use in immunocompromised patients. Thus, this meta-analysis aims to assess the effects of HFNC, compared to conventional oxygen therapy (COT) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV), on the outcomes in immunocompromised patients with ARF. The Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched up to November 2018. Materials and Methods: Only clinical studies comparing the effect of HFNC with COT or NIV for immunocompromised patients with ARF were included. The outcome included the rate of intubation, mortality and length of stay (LOS). Results: A total of eight studies involving 1433 immunocompromised patients with ARF were enrolled. The pooled analysis showed that HFNC was significantly associated with a reduced intubation rate (risk ratio (RR), 0.83; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.74-0.94, I2 = 0%). Among subgroup analysis, HFNC was associated with a lower intubation rate than COT (RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75-0.95, I2 = 0%) and NIV (RR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.40-0.86, I2 = 0%), respectively. However, there was no significant difference between HFNC and control groups in terms of 28-day mortality (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.58-1.04, I2 = 48%), and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.73-1.05, I2 = 57%). The ICU and hospital LOS were similar between HFNC and control groups (ICU LOS: mean difference, 0.49 days; 95% CI, -0.25-1.23, I2 = 69%; hospital LOS: mean difference, -0.12 days; 95% CI, -1.86-1.61, I2 = 64%). Conclusions: Use of HFNC may decrease the intubation rate in immunocompromised patients with ARF compared with the control group, including COT and NIV. However, HFNC could not provide additional survival benefit or shorten the LOS. Further large, randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings.

High-flow nasal cannula oxygenation utilization in respiratory failure

High flow nasal cannula (HFNC) represents a new oxygenation system to be used in the treatment of respiratory emergencies. During HFNC therapy, the active humidification and air heating system allow the patient to tolerate higher flows by favouring physiologic mucociliary clearance and improving fluidity of respiratory secretions. Following this, FiO₂ values are more stable and reliable, by reducing losses and minimizing ambient air entrainment. Several clinical trials in acute respiratory failure patients have suggested lower rate of invasive mechanical ventilation, improved comfort and enhanced survival by early HFNC utilization in comparison with conventional oxygen therapy (COT) or non-invasive ventilation (NIV). This review aims to summarize the main evidences on the use of HFNC in the acute setting and its major indications.

Noninvasive Oxygenation Strategies in Immunocompromised Patients With Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: A Pairwise and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

INTRODUCTION

Acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) is a leading cause of intensive care unit (ICU) admission among immunocompromised patients. Invasive mechanical ventilation is associated with increased morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of various oxygenation strategies including noninvasive ventilation (NIV), high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC), and conventional oxygen therapy in immunocompromised patients with AHRF.

METHODS

Electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were reviewed from inception to December 2018. We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different modalities of initial oxygenation strategies in immunocompromised patients with AHRF. Our primary outcome was the need for intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation while secondary outcomes were ICU acquired infections and short- and long-term mortality. Data were extracted separately and independently by 2 reviewers. We performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis to calculate odds ratio (OR) and Bayesian 95% credible intervals (CrIs).

RESULTS

Nine RCTs were included (1570 patients, mean age 61.1 ± 13.8 years with 64% male). Noninvasive ventilation was associated with a significantly reduced intubation rate compared with standard oxygen therapy (OR: 0.53; 95% CrI: 0.26-0.91). There were no significant reductions of intubation between NIV versus HFNC (OR: 0.83; 95% CrI: 0.35-2.11) or HFNC versus standard oxygen therapy (OR: 0.65; 95% CrI: 0.26-1.24). There were no significant differences between all groups regarding short-term (28-day or ICU) mortality or long-term (90-day or hospital) mortality or ICU-acquired infections (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Among immunocompromised patients with AHRF, NIV was associated with a significant reduction of intubation compared with standard oxygen therapy. There were no significant differences among all oxygenation strategies regarding mortality and ICU-acquired infections.

High flow nasal therapy in immunocompromised patients with acute respiratory failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The role of high-flow nasal therapy (HFNT) as compared to conventional oxygen therapy (COT) in immunocompromised patients admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) with acute respiratory failure (ARF) remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis in order to address this issue.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Medline and Embase until November 7th, 2018. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomized prospective and retrospective evidence were selected. Observational studies were considered for sensitivity analysis. Primary outcome was mortality rate; intubation rate was a secondary outcome.

RESULTS

We included four studies in the primary analysis: one RCT, two RCT's post-hoc analyses and one retrospective study. We found no significant difference in short-term mortality comparing HFNT vs. COT: 1) ICU: n = 872 patients, odds ratio (OR) = 0.80 [0.44,1.45], p = 0.46, I² = 30%, p = 0.24; 2) 28-day: n = 996 patients, OR = 0.79 [0.45,1.38], p = 0.40, I² = 52%, p = 0.12). Conversely, we found a reduction of intubation rate in the HFNT group (n = 1052 patients, OR = 0.74 [0.55,0.98], p = 0.03, I² = 7%, p = 0.36). The inclusion of one observational study for sensitivity analysis did not grossly change results.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no benefit of HFNT over COT on mortality in immunocompromised patients with ARF. However, HFNT was associated with a lower intubation rate warranting further research.

Prise en charge du transplanté rénal en réanimation

La transplantation rénale est la thérapeutique de choix de l’insuffisance rénale chronique au stade ultime, son usage est de plus en plus large. Les progrès réalisés dans les traitements immunosuppresseurs ont permis une amélioration de la durée de vie du greffon, mais au prix d’une augmentation des complications cardiovasculaires et infectieuses. Environ 5 % des transplantés rénaux présentent des complications sévères qui nécessitent une prise en charge intensive. Elles sont principalement de cause infectieuse et dominées par la défaillance respiratoire aiguë. L’insuffisance rénale aiguë est commune, elle affecte la fonction du greffon à court et long termes. La prise en charge en réanimation de ces complications doit prendre en compte le terrain particulier du transplanté rénal et les effets délétères de l’immunosuppression, condition nécessaire à une amélioration de la mortalité qui reste à plus de 30 %.

Noninvasive ventilation in acute respiratory failure: which recipe for success?

Noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NPPV) to treat acute respiratory failure has expanded tremendously over the world in terms of the spectrum of diseases that can be successfully managed, the locations of its application and achievable goals.

The turning point for the successful expansion of NPPV is its ability to achieve the same physiological effects as invasive mechanical ventilation with the avoidance of the life-threatening risks correlated with the use of an artificial airway.

Cardiorespiratory arrest, extreme psychomotor agitation, severe haemodynamic instability, nonhypercapnic coma and multiple organ failure are absolute contraindications for NPPV. Moreover, pitfalls of NPPV reduce its rate of success; consistently, a clear plan of what to do in case of NPPV failure should be considered, especially for patients managed in unprotected setting. NPPV failure is likely to be reduced by the application of integrated therapeutic tools in selected patients handled by expert teams.

In conclusion, NPPV has to be considered as a rational art and not just as an application of science, which requires the ability of clinicians to both choose case-by-case the best “ingredients” for a “successful recipe” (i.e.patient selection, interface, ventilator, interface,etc.) and to avoid a delayed intubation if the ventilation attempt fails.