High-Flow Nasal Oxygen in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients With Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: A Multicenter, Retrospective Cohort Study

High-Flow Nasal Cannula in COVID-19 Patients With Moderate to Severe Respiratory Distress: A Retrospective Analysis

BACKGROUND

A high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is a device for non-invasive ventilation (NIV). It was utilized during the COVID-19 pandemic in patients with moderate to severe respiratory distress due to its benefit profile in delaying intubation, ease of use, and comfort of patients in comparison to NIV.

OBJECTIVES

Our main objective is to calculate the intubation rate of patients with suspected or lab-confirmed COVID-19 in moderate to severe respiratory distress who failed graded oxygen therapy (GOT). Before incorporating HFNC as a treatment option, the intubation rate was 100% after GOT failure. We calculated the rate of intubation at two, six, and 12 hours of starting HFNC, where each patient is in their own control with an assumed intubation rate of 100%. Other objectives include measuring the rate of improvement of the ROX index, respiratory rate (RR), and oxygen saturation (SPO2) levels at two, six, and 12 hours.

METHODS

We retrospectively screened patients with suspected or lab-confirmed COVID-19 infection in moderate to severe respiratory distress at Rashid Hospital Trauma Center, Emergency Department in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, from April 10, 2020, until December 31, 2020. The list of patients was pooled from the SALAMA electronic system.

RESULTS

A total of 121 patients were included in the analysis. Assuming an intubation rate of 100% at 0 hours (end of GOT), after starting HFNC, the intubation rate (primary outcome) at two hours was 7.43% (9/121), at six hours was 7.14% (8/112), and at 12 hours was 5.77% (6/104). The total intubation rate at 12 hours was 19% (23/121). The use of HFNC was also shown to improve the ROX index, RR, and SPO2 at two, six, and 12 hours.

CONCLUSION

In patients with suspected or lab-confirmed COVID-19 in moderate to severe respiratory distress who failed GOT and were started on HFNC, it was noted that the intubation rate decreased from an assumed rate of 100% to 19% at 12 hours from starting the treatment. There was also a statistically significant improvement in the ROX index, SPO2, and RR at two, six, and 12 hours from the initiation at 0 hours.

Treatment options for patients with severe COVID-19

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected the world for over 3 years. Treatment options have improved substantially during this period, including antiviral drugs, antibody drugs, immune-based agents, and vaccination. While these improvements have reduced mortality rates in patients with COVID-19, some patients still develop severe illness. In this review, we aimed to provide an overview of treatments for patients with severe COVID-19 from study reports and clinical experience. We discussed the treatments from two perspectives: respiratory care and drug treatments. In the respiratory care section, we discussed the usefulness of high-flow nasal cannula therapy and non-invasive ventilation as an alternative to invasive ventilation. In the drug treatments section, we focused on three classes for severe COVID-19 treatment: antiviral drugs, immune-based agents, and anticoagulation therapy. We did not discuss antibody drugs and vaccination, as they are not used for severe COVID-19 treatment.

Predicting Failure of Noninvasive Respiratory Support Using Deep Recurrent Learning

BACKGROUND

Noninvasive respiratory support (NRS) is increasingly used to support patients with acute respiratory failure. However, noninvasive support failure may worsen outcomes compared to primary support with invasive mechanical ventilation. Therefore, there is a need to identify patients where NRS is failing so that treatment can be reassessed and adjusted. The objective of this study was to develop and evaluate 3 recurrent neural network (RNN) models to predict NRS failure.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional observational study to evaluate the ability of deep RNN models (long short-term memory [LSTM], gated recurrent unit [GRU]), and GRU with trainable decay) to predict failure of NRS. Data were extracted from electronic health records from all adult (≥ 18 y) patient records requiring any type of oxygen therapy or mechanical ventilation between November 1, 2013-September 30, 2020, across 46 ICUs in the Southwest United States in a single health care network. Input variables for each model included serum chloride, creatinine, albumin, breathing frequency, heart rate, SpO2 , FIO2 , arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2 ), and 2 measurements each (point-of-care and laboratory measurement) of PaO2 and partial pressure of arterial oxygen from an arterial blood gas.

RESULTS

Time series data from electronic health records were available for 22,075 subjects. The highest accuracy and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve were for the LSTM model (94.04% and 0.9636, respectively). Accurate predictions were made 12 h after ICU admission, and performance remained high well in advance of NRS failure.

CONCLUSIONS

RNN models using routinely collected time series data can accurately predict NRS failure well before intubation. This lead time may provide an opportunity to intervene to optimize patient outcomes.

The effects of high-flow oxygen therapy on mortality in patients with COVID-19

BACKGROUND

High-flow oxygen therapy (HFOT) has been successful in treating acute hypoxic respiratory failure (AHRF) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Successful treatment with noninvasive ventilation and avoidance of mechanical ventilation (MV) has been associated with decreased mortality and positive patient outcomes. It is unclear whether the evidence supports the use of HFOT to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-induced AHRF and ARDS.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether the use of HFOT decreases the need for intubation or decreases mortality compared with MV in patients with AHRF due to COVID-19.

DATA SOURCES

A literature search was conducted in March 2022 using CINAHL, Embase, PubMed, and Scopus bibliographic databases. Ten studies comparing HFOT and MV in COVID-19 respiratory failure met inclusion criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Nine studies found a statistically significant reduction in the need for intubation; eight studies found significantly decreased morality in patients who received HFOT. Study design and methodologies limited the findings.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Based on the available evidence, the use of HFOT positively affected mortality and incidence of the need for intubation and MV. Further research needs to be conducted before HFOT is adopted as the standard of care for COVID-19-induced AHRF and ARDS. Nurse practitioners should be informed regarding the various respiratory support modalities and evaluate risk versus benefit when caring for patients with COVID-19-induced AHRF and ARDS.

Effectiveness of high-flow nasal cannula therapy on clinical outcomes in adults with COVID-19: A systematic review

Introduction/Background

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has high transmissibility and mortality rates. High-flow nasal cannula therapy (HFNC) might reduce the need for orotracheal intubation, easing the burden on the health system caused by COVID-19. The objective of the present study was to examine the effectiveness of HFNC in adult patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Specifically, the present study explores the effects of HFNC on rates of mortality, intubation and intensive care units (ICU) length of stay. The present study also seeks to define predictors of success and failure of HFNC.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted in the PubMed, EMBASE and SCOPUS databases, and the study was prepared according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Study quality was assessed using the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's Study Quality Assessment Tools.

Results

The search identified 1,476 unique titles; 95 articles received full-text reviews and 40 studies were included in this review. HFNC was associated with a reduction in the rate of orotracheal intubation, notably when compared to conventional oxygen therapy. Studies reported inconsistency in whether HFNC reduced ICU length of stay or mortality rates. Among the predictors of HFNC failure/success, a ratio of oxygen saturation index of approximately 5 or more was associated with HFNC success.

Conclusion

In adult patients hospitalized with COVID-19, HFNC may prove effective in reducing the rate of orotracheal intubation. The ratio of the oxygen saturation index was the parameter most examined as a predictor of HFNC success. Low-level research designs, inherent study weaknesses and inconsistent findings made it impossible to conclude whether HFNC reduces ICU length of stay or mortality. Future studies should employ higher level research designs.

Prehospital Respiratory Early Warning Score for airway management in-ambulance: A score comparison

BACKGROUND

Prehospital Respiratory Early Warning Scores to estimate the requirement for advanced respiratory support is needed. To develop a prehospital Respiratory Early Warning Score to estimate the requirement for advanced respiratory support.

METHODS

Multicentre, prospective, emergency medical services (EMS)-delivered, longitudinal cohort derivationvalidation study carried out in 59 ambulances and five hospitals across five Spanish provinces. Adults with acute diseases evaluated, supported and discharged to the Emergency Department with high priority were eligible. The primary outcome was the need for invasive or non-invasive respiratory support (NIRS or IRS) in the prehospital scope at the first contact with the patient. The measures included the following: epidemiological endpoints, prehospital vital signs (respiratory rate, pulse oximetry saturation, fraction of inspired oxygen, systolic and diastolic mean blood pressure, heart rate, tympanic temperature and consciousness level by the GCS).

RESULTS

Between 26 Oct 2018 and 26 Oct 2021, we enrolled 5793 cases. For NIRS prediction, the final model of the logistic regression included respiratory rate and pulse oximetry saturation/fraction of inspired oxygen ratio. For the IRS case, the motor response from the Glasgow Coma Scale was also included. The REWS showed an AUC of 0.938 (95% CI: 0.918-0.958), a calibration-in-large of 0.026 and a higher net benefit as compared with the other scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results showed that REWS is a remarkably aid for the decision-making process in the management of advanced respiratory support in prehospital care. Including this score in the prehospital scenario could improve patients' care and optimise the resources' management.

High flow nasal oxygen therapy for COVID 19: an unusual complication

Background

Acute hypoxemic respiratory failure is the most common complication of COVID 19 infection. Newer ways for oxygen therapy were explored during this pandemic. High flow nasal oxygenation (HFNO) emerged as a novel technique for oxygenation and prevented the need for invasive mechanical ventilation during hypoxia among COVID patients. Using high flow oxygen dries the nasal mucosa and leads to skin disruption. We are presenting this case as this complication has not been reported anywhere to our knowledge.

Case presentation

Here we present a case of a 62-year-old male, who was on HFNO for a long time as a part of treatment for COVID 19 and developed ulceration in the nasal septa. Patient belonged to a geriatric age group and had diabetes mellitus. Close monitoring by ICU (intensive care unit) staff was a big problem during this pandemic. Daily physical assessment, good nutrition, and daily dressing with plastic surgery consultation helped treat our patient.

Conclusions

Geriatric patients with other co-morbidities are vulnerable to mucosal injury. Even in COVID era, everyday general physical surveillance is very vital in such patients to prevent these complications. During this pandemic close monitoring of patients suffered due to scarcity of ICU staff. In spite of that, it is a must to ensure daily physical surveillance and good supplemental nutrition especially in geriatric patients.

Intensive care unit adaptations in the COVID-19 pandemic: Lessons learned

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic had deleterious effects on the healthcare systems around the world. To increase intensive care units (ICUs) bed capacities, multiple adaptations had to be made to increase surge capacity. In this editorial, we demonstrate the changes made by an ICU of a midwest community hospital in the United States. These changes included moving patients that used to be managed in the ICU to progressive care units, such as patients requiring non-invasive ventilation and high flow nasal cannula, ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients, and post-neurosurgery patients. Additionally, newer tactics were applied to the processes of assessing oxygen supply and demand, patient care rounds, and post-ICU monitoring.

Risk factors for mechanical ventilation and ECMO in COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU: A multicenter retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

The primary purpose of this study was to investigate risk factors associated with the need for mechanical ventilation (MV) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU).

METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled 66 consecutive COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICUs of three Japanese institutions from February 2020 to January 2021. We performed logistic regression analyses to identify risk factors associated with subsequent MV and ECMO requirements. Further, multivariate analyses were performed following adjustment for Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II scores.

RESULTS

At ICU admission, the risk factors for subsequent MV identified were: higher age (Odds Ratio (OR) 1.04, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.00-1.08, P = 0.03), higher values of APACHE II score (OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.08-1.33, P < 0.001), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.18-1.97, P < 0.001), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.02, p<0.001) and C-reactive protein (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.00-1.19, P = 0.04), and lower values of lymphocytes (OR 1.00, 95% CI 1.00-1.00, P = 0.02) and antithrombin (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.91-0.95, P < 0.01). Patients who subsequently required ECMO showed lower values of estimated glomerular filtration rate (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.96-1.00, P = 0.04) and antithrombin (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.88-1.00, P = 0.03) at ICU admission. Multivariate analysis showed that higher body mass index (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.00-1.40, P = 0.04) and higher levels of LDH (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.01-1.02, P < 0.01) were independent risk factors for the need for MV. Lower level of antithrombin (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.88-1.00, P = 0.03) was a risk factor for the need for ECMO.

CONCLUSION

We showed that low antithrombin level at ICU admission might be a risk factor for subsequent ECMO requirements, in addition to other previously reported factors.

Clinical update on COVID-19 for the emergency clinician: Airway and resuscitation

INTRODUCTION

Coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in millions of cases worldwide. As the pandemic has progressed, the understanding of this disease has evolved.

OBJECTIVE

This narrative review provides emergency clinicians with a focused update of the resuscitation and airway management of COVID-19.

DISCUSSION

Patients with COVID-19 and septic shock should be resuscitated with buffered/balanced crystalloids. If hypotension is present despite intravenous fluids, vasopressors including norepinephrine should be initiated. Stress dose steroids are recommended for patients with severe or refractory septic shock. Airway management is the mainstay of initial resuscitation in patients with COVID-19. Patients with COVID-19 and ARDS should be managed similarly to those ARDS patients without COVID-19. Clinicians should not delay intubation if indicated. In patients who are more clinically stable, physicians can consider a step-wise approach as patients' oxygenation needs escalate. High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) are recommended over elective intubation. Prone positioning, even in awake patients, has been shown to lower intubation rates and improve oxygenation. Strategies consistent with ARDSnet can be implemented in this patient population, with a goal tidal volume of 4-8 mL/kg of predicted body weight and targeted plateau pressures <30 cm H₂O. Limited data support the use of neuromuscular blocking agents (NBMA), recruitment maneuvers, inhaled pulmonary vasodilators, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).

CONCLUSION

This review presents a concise update of the resuscitation strategies and airway management techniques in patients with COVID-19 for emergency medicine clinicians.

Predictors of Noninvasive Respiratory Support Failure in COVID-19 Patients: A Prospective Observational Study

Background and Objective: Respiratory assistance tactic that is best for COVID-19-associated acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) individuals has yet to be determined. Patients with AHRF may benefit from the use of a high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and non-invasive ventilation (NIV). The goals of this prospective observational research were to estimate predictive factors for HFNC and NIV failure in COVID-19-related AHRF subjects. Materials and Methods: The research enlisted the participation of 124 patients. A stepwise treatment approach was used. HFNC and NIV were used on 124 (100%) and 64 (51.6%) patients, respectively. Thirty (24.2%) of 124 patients were intubated and received invasive mechanical ventilation. Results: 85 (68.5%) patients were managed successfully. Patients who required NIV exhibited a higher prevalence of treatment failure (70.3% vs. 51.6%, p = 0.019) and had higher mortality (59.4% vs. 31.5%, p = 0.001) than patients who received HFNC. Using logistic regression, the respiratory rate oxygenation (ROX) index at 24 h (odds ratio (OR) = 0.74, p = 0.018) and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) (OR = 1.60, p = 0.003) were found to be predictors of HFNC efficacy. It was the ROX index at 24 h and the CCI optimum cut-off values for HFNC outcome that were 6.1 (area under the curve (AUC) = 0.73) and 2.5 (AUC = 0.68), respectively. Serum ferritin level (OR = 0.23, p = 0.041) and lymphocyte count (OR = 1.03, p = 0.01) were confirmed as predictors of NIV failure. Serum ferritin level at a cut-off value of 456.2 ng/mL (AUC = 0.67) and lymphocyte count lower than 0.70 per mm³, (AUC = 0.70) were associated with NIV failure with 70.5% sensitivity, 68.7% specificity and sensitivity of 84.1%, specificity of 56.2%, respectively. Conclusion: The ROX index at 24 h, CCI, as well as serum ferritin level, and lymphocyte count can be used as markers for HFNC and NIV failure, respectively, in SARS-CoV-2-induced AHRF patients.

SIMEU position paper on non-invasive respiratory support in COVID-19 pneumonia

The rapid worldwide spread of the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) crisis has put health systems under pressure to a level never experienced before, putting intensive care units in a position to fail to meet an exponentially growing demand. The main clinical feature of the disease is a progressive arterial hypoxemia which rapidly leads to ARDS which makes the use of intensive care and mechanical ventilation almost inevitable. The difficulty of health systems to guarantee a corresponding supply of resources in intensive care, together with the uncertain results reported in the literature with respect to patients who undergo early conventional ventilation, make the search for alternative methods of oxygenation and ventilation and potentially preventive of the need for tracheal intubation, such as non-invasive respiratory support techniques particularly valuable. In this context, the Emergency Department, located between the area outside the hospital and hospital ward and ICU, assumes the role of a crucial junction, due to the possibility of applying these techniques at a sufficiently early stage and being able to rapidly evaluate their effectiveness. This position paper describes the indications for the use of non-invasive respiratory support techniques in respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19-related pneumonia, formulated by the Non-invasive Ventilation Faculty of the Italian Society of Emergency Medicine (SIMEU) on the base of what is available in the literature and on the authors' direct experience. Rationale, literature, tips & tricks, resources, risks and expected results, and patient interaction will be discussed for each one of the escalating non-invasive respiratory techniques: standard oxygen, HFNCO, CPAP, NIPPV, and awake self-repositioning. The final chapter describes our suggested approach to the failing patient.

High-flow Nasal Oxygen Therapy in COVID-19 Critically Ill Patients with Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study

Background

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is prone to acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF). Because tracheal intubation is associated with a higher risk of death in these patients, AHRF employs high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (HFNOT). The goal of this study was to assess the effect of HFNOT on oxygenation status as well as different predictors of HFNOT failure.

Methods

A prospective observational cohort study was conducted in COVID-positive critically ill adult patients (age >18 years) with AHRF, who were unable to maintain SpO₂ >90% on a non-rebreathing face mask at an oxygen flow ≥15 L/minute. Respiratory variables (PaO₂/FiO₂, SpO₂, and RR) before HFNOT (baseline) and then at 1 hour, 6 hours, 7th day, and 14th day after HFNOT application were recorded. Borg CR10 scale and visual analogue scale were used to evaluate the subjective sensation of dyspnea and comfort level, respectively. As needed, Student's t, Mann–Whitney U, or Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were performed. To find parameters linked to HFNOT failure, multivariate logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis were employed.

Results

A total of 114 patients were enrolled in the study, with an HFNOT failure rate of 29%. The median PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio at baseline (before the initiation of HFNOT) was 99.5 (80–110) which significantly increased at various time points (1 hour, 6 hours, 7th day, and 14th day) after HFNOT initiation in the successful group. Patients reported significant improvement in sensation of breathlessness [9 (8–10), 3 (2–4); p <0.001] as well as in comfort level [2 (1–2), 8 (4–9); p <0.001]. Multivariate logistic regression analysis, sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score >7, acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) II score >20, admission P/F ratio <100, D-dimer >2 mg/L, IL-6 >40 pg/mL, random blood sugar (RBS) >250 mg/dL, and 6 hours ROX Index <3.5 were independent prognostic factors of HFNOT failure.

Conclusion

The use of HFNOT significantly increased the oxygenation levels in COVID-19 patients with AHRF at various time periods after HFNOT beginning. Age, SOFA score, APACHE II score, ROX score, admission P/F ratio, IL-6, D-dimer, and RBS were independent prognostic factors of HFNOT failure in this cohort.

How to cite this article

Khan MS, Prakash J, Banerjee S, Bhattacharya PK, Kumar R, Nirala DK. High-flow Nasal Oxygen Therapy in COVID-19 Critically Ill Patients with Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(5):596–603.

Non-invasive respiratory support in the management of acute COVID-19 pneumonia: considerations for clinical practice and priorities for research

Non-invasive respiratory support (NIRS) has increasingly been used in the management of COVID-19-associated acute respiratory failure, but questions remain about the utility, safety, and outcome benefit of NIRS strategies. We identified two randomised controlled trials and 83 observational studies, compromising 13 931 patients, that examined the effects of NIRS modalities-high-flow nasal oxygen, continuous positive airway pressure, and bilevel positive airway pressure-on patients with COVID-19. Of 5120 patients who were candidates for full treatment escalation, 1880 (37%) progressed to invasive mechanical ventilation and 3658 of 4669 (78%) survived to study end. Survival was 30% among the 1050 patients for whom NIRS was the stated ceiling of treatment. The two randomised controlled trials indicate superiority of non-invasive ventilation over high-flow nasal oxygen in reducing the need for intubation. Reported complication rates were low. Overall, the studies indicate that NIRS in patients with COVID-19 is safe, improves resource utilisation, and might be associated with better outcomes. To guide clinical decision making, prospective, randomised studies are needed to address timing of intervention, optimal use of NIRS modalities-alone or in combination-and validation of tools such as oxygenation indices, response to a trial of NIRS, and inflammatory markers as predictors of treatment success.

Noninvasive respiratory support for acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Noninvasive respiratory support has been widely applied during the COVID-19 pandemic. We provide a narrative review on the benefits and possible harms of noninvasive respiratory support for COVID-19 respiratory failure.

RECENT FINDINGS

Maintenance of spontaneous breathing by means of noninvasive respiratory support in hypoxemic patients with vigorous spontaneous effort carries the risk of patient self-induced lung injury: the benefit of averting intubation in successful patients should be balanced with the harms of a worse outcome in patients who are intubated after failing a trial of noninvasive support.The risk of noninvasive treatment failure is greater in patients with the most severe oxygenation impairment (PaO2/FiO2 < 200 mmHg).High-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) is the most widely applied intervention in COVID-19 patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure. Also, noninvasive ventilation (NIV) and continuous positive airway pressure delivered with different interfaces have been used with variable success rates. A single randomized trial showed lower need for intubation in patients receiving helmet NIV with specific settings, compared to HFNO alone.Prone positioning is recommended for moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome patients on invasive ventilation. Awake prone position has been frequently applied in COVID-19 patients: one randomized trial showed improved oxygenation and lower intubation rate in patients receiving 6-h sessions of awake prone positioning, as compared to conventional management.

SUMMARY

Noninvasive respiratory support and awake prone position are tools possibly capable of averting endotracheal intubation in COVID-19 patients; carefully monitoring during any treatment is warranted to avoid delays in endotracheal intubation, especially in patients with PaO2/FiO2 < 200 mmHg.

High-Flow Nasal Cannula and COVID-19: A Clinical Review

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, noninvasive respiratory support has played a central role in managing patients affected by moderate-to-severe acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, despite inadequate scientific evidence to support its usage. High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) treatment has gained popularity because of its effectiveness in delivering a high fraction of humidified oxygen, which improves ventilatory efficiency and the respiratory pattern, as well as its reported high tolerability, ease of use, and application outside of ICUs. Nevertheless, the risk of infection transmission to health-care workers has raised some concerns about its use in the first wave of the pandemic outbreak, with controversial recommendations provided by different scientific societies. This narrative review provides an overview of the recent evidence on the physiologic rationale, risks, and benefits of using HFNC instead of conventional oxygen therapy and other types of noninvasive respiratory support devices, such as continuous positive airway pressure and noninvasive ventilation in patients affected by COVID-19 pneumonia with associated acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. It also summarizes the available evidence with regard to the clinical use of HFNC during the current pandemic and its reported outcomes, and highlights the risks of bioaerosol dispersion associated with HFNC use.

Non-invasive Respiratory Support in COVID-19: A Narrative Review

Acute respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 pneumonia may require a variety of non-pharmacological strategies in addition to oxygen therapy to avoid endotracheal intubation. The response to all these strategies, which include high nasal flow, continuous positive pressure, non-invasive ventilation, or even prone positioning in awake patients, can be highly variable depending on the predominant phenotypic involvement. Deciding when to replace conventional oxygen therapy with non-invasive respiratory support, which to choose, the role of combined methods, definitions, and attitudes toward treatment failure, and improved case improvement procedures are directly relevant clinical questions for the daily care of critically ill COVID-19 patients. The experience accumulated after more than a year of the pandemic should lead to developing recommendations that give answers to all these questions.

Effectiveness of the use of a high-flow nasal cannula to treat COVID-19 patients and risk factors for failure: a meta-analysis

Background:

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread globally, and many patients with severe cases have received oxygen therapy through a high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC).

Objectives:

We assessed the efficacy of HFNC for treating patients with COVID-19 and risk factors for HFNC failure.

Methods:

We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies of HFNC in patients with COVID-19 published in English from January 1st, 2020 to August 15th, 2021. The primary aim was to assess intubation, mortality, and failure rates in COVID-19 patients supported by HFNC. Secondary aims were to compare HFNC success and failure groups and to describe the risk factors for HFNC failure.

Results:

A total of 25 studies fulfilled selection criteria and included 2851 patients. The intubation, mortality, and failure rates were 0.44 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.38–0.51, I² = 84%), 0.23 (95% CI: 0.19–0.29, I² = 88%), and 0.47 (95% CI: 0.42–0.51, I² = 56%), respectively. Compared to the success group, age, body mass index (BMI), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score, D-dimer, lactate, heart rate, and respiratory rate were higher and PaO₂, PaO₂/FiO₂, ROX index (the ratio of SpO₂/FiO₂ to respiratory rate), ROX index after the initiation of HFNC, and duration of HFNC were lower in the failure group (all Ps < 0.05). There were also more smokers and more comorbidities in the failure group (all Ps < 0.05). Pooled odds ratios (ORs) revealed that older age (OR: 1.04, 95% CI: 1.01–1.07, P = 0.02, I² = 88%), a higher white blood cell (WBC) count (OR: 1.06, 95% CI: 1.01–1.12, P = 0.02, I² = 0%), a higher heart rate (OR: 1.42, 95% CI: 1.15–1.76, P < 0.01, I² = 0%), and a lower ROX index(OR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.39–0.95, P = 0.03, I² = 93%) after the initiation of HFNC were all significant risk factors for HFNC failure.

Conclusions:

HFNC is an effective way of providing respiratory support in the treatment of COVID-19 patients. Older age, a higher WBC count, a higher heart rate, and a lower ROX index after the initiation of HFNC are associated with an increased risk of HFNC failure.

Use of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen and risk factors for high-flow nasal cannula oxygen failure in critically-ill patients with COVID-19

BACKGROUND

High-flow nasal oxygen therapy (HFNC) may be an attractive first-line ventilatory support in COVID-19 patients. However, HNFC use for the management of COVID-19 patients and risk factors for HFNC failure remain to be determined.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we included all consecutive COVID-19 patients admitted to our intensive care unit (ICU) in the first (Mars-May 2020) and second (August 2020- February 202) French pandemic waves. Patients with limitations for intubation were excluded. HFNC failure was defined as the need for intubation after ICU admission. The impact of HFNC use was analyzed in the whole cohort and after constructing a propensity score. Risk factors for HNFC failure were identified through a landmark time-dependent cause-specific Cox model. The ability of the 6-h ROX index to detect HFNC failure was assessed by generating receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

RESULTS

200 patients were included: HFNC was used in 114(57%) patients, non-invasive ventilation in 25(12%) patients and 145(72%) patients were intubated with a median delay of 0 (0-2) days after ICU admission. Overall, 78(68%) patients had HFNC failure. Patients with HFNC failure had a higher ICU mortality rate (34 vs. 11%, p = 0.02) than those without. At landmark time of 48 and 72 h, SAPS-2 score, extent of CT-Scan abnormalities > 75% and HFNC duration (cause specific hazard ratio (CSH) = 0.11, 95% CI (0.04-0.28), per + 1 day, p < 0.001 at 48 h and CSH = 0.06, 95% CI (0.02-0.23), per + 1 day, p < 0.001 at 72 h) were associated with HFNC failure. The 6-h ROX index was lower in patients with HFNC failure but could not reliably predicted HFNC failure with an area under ROC curve of 0.65 (95% CI(0.52-0.78), p = 0.02). In the matched cohort, HFNC use was associated with a lower risk of intubation (CSH = 0.32, 95% CI (0.19-0.57), p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In critically-ill COVID-19 patients, while HFNC use as first-line ventilatory support was associated with a lower risk of intubation, more than half of patients had HFNC failure. Risk factors for HFNC failure were SAPS-2 score and extent of CT-Scan abnormalities > 75%. The risk of HFNC failure could not be predicted by the 6-h ROX index but decreased after a 48-h HFNC duration.

Triage and monitoring of COVID-19 patients in intensive care using unsupervised machine learning

BACKGROUND

We designed an algorithm to assess COVID-19 patients severity and dynamic intubation needs and predict their length of stay using the breathing frequency (BF) and oxygen saturation (SpO₂) signals.

METHODS

We recorded the BF and SpO₂ signals for confirmed COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU of a teaching hospital during both the first and subsequent outbreaks of the pandemic in France. An unsupervised machine-learning algorithm (the Gaussian mixture model) was applied to the patients' data for clustering. The algorithm's robustness was ensured by comparing its results against actual intubation rates. We predicted intubation rates using the algorithm every hour, thus conducting a severity evaluation. We designed a S₂₄ severity score that represented the patient's severity over the previous 24 h; the validity of MS₂₄, the maximum S₂₄ score, was checked against rates of intubation risk and prolonged ICU stay.

RESULTS

Our sample included 279 patients. . The unsupervised clustering had an accuracy rate of 87.8% for intubation recognition (AUC = 0.94, True Positive Rate 86.5%, true Negative Rate 90.9%). The S₂₄ score of intubated patients was significantly higher than that of non-intubated patients at 48 h before intubation. The MS₂₄ score allowed for the distinguishing between three severity levels with an increased risk of intubation: green (3.4%), orange (37%), and red (77%). A MS₂₄ score over 40 was highly predictive of an ICU stay greater than 5 days at an accuracy rate of 81.0% (AUC = 0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

Our algorithm uses simple signals and seems to efficiently visualize the patients' respiratory situations, meaning that it has the potential to assist staffs' in decision-making. Additionally, real-time computation is easy to implement.

The effect of transnasal humidified rapid-insufflation ventilator exchange (THRIVE) versus nasal prongs on safe apnoea time in paralysed obese patients: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Evidence is lacking regarding the efficacy of Optiflow transnasal humidified rapid-insufflation ventilator exchange (THRIVE™) in obese patients. We compared the impact of this technique at 70 L min^-1 with 4 L min^-1 oxygen via nasal prongs on safe apnoea times of paralysed obese patients.

METHODS

We randomised adults with a BMI >35 kg m^-2 undergoing elective bariatric surgery. While apnoeic and paralysed, Group T received 70 L min^-1 oxygen via Optiflow THRIVE™. Group N received nasal prong oxygen at 4 L min^-1. The primary outcome was time to SpO₂ ≤95% while apnoeic, with a 360 s cut-off. This was analysed by applying a time-to-event analysis.

RESULTS

Forty-two patients were included. The median (inter-quartile range) BMI was 44.8 kg m^-2 (40.0-50.0) in Group T and 42.0 kg m^-2 (39.3-45.1) in Group N. Median (inter-quartile range) time to SpO₂ ≤95% in Group T was 356 (165 to ≥360) s and in Group N, 210 (160-270) s. Using a survival analysis framework, median time-to-event in Group T was 356 s (95% confidence interval 165 s-upper limit not defined) and 210 s (95% confidence interval 160-242 s) (P=0.049) in Group N.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with oxygen delivered via nasal prongs at 4 L min^-1, oxygen delivery via Optiflow THRIVE™ at a flow rate of 70 L min^-1 can prolong safe apnoea time, however, the results are statistically inconclusive. Optiflow THRIVE™ did decrease the rate of reduction in Pa_o2 during apnoea.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ANZCTR 12618000445279.

Reorganizing the respiratory high dependency unit for pandemics

INTRODUCTION

Respiratory high dependency units (RHDUs) set up in European countries in the last decade are based on being a transitional step between the intensive care units (ICUs) and the conventional hospital ward in terms of staffing, level of monitoring, and patients' severity. In the pre-COVID-19 era, its main use has been the treatment of hypercapnic acute-on-chronic respiratory failure with noninvasive respiratory support, and more recently, for hypoxemic acute respiratory failure.

AREAS COVERED

We searched the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, limited to the terms: COVID-19 and RHDU, Respiratory Intermediate care Unit, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), noninvasive ventilation (NIV), high flow nasal cannula (HFNC), prone position, and monitoring. In this review, we summarize RHDU´s dual purpose: on the one hand, to decrease the number of admissions into ICU, and on the other hand, early discharges of patients from ICU with prolonged admissions due to the need of care or laborious weaning from invasive mechanical ventilation. Although this dual purpose of RHDUs has contributed to decrease the overload of the ICUs during the pandemic, the hundreds of patients admitted in hospitals, with approximately 20%-30% needing critical care, has exceeded the forecasts of many hospitals.

EXPERT OPINION

It seems clear that a reorganization and optimization of the care of patients with severe COVID-19 is necessary, minimizing admissions to the ICU and facilitating an early discharge. During the pandemic, several hospitals have spontaneously created new RHDUs or extended preexisting RHDUs or up-graded respiratory wards in order to receive less sick patients requiring lower levels of monitoring and nurse-to-patient ratios. This article reviews under a European expert perspective this topic and proposes an adaptation and optimization of the RHDUs to meet the emergent needs caused by the pandemic emphasizing the role of the expert application of noninvasive respiratory therapies in preventing intubation and ICU access.

Ten things you need to know about intensive care unit management of mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19

Introduction: The ongoing pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has posed important challenges for clinicians and health-care systems worldwide.Areas covered: The aim of this manuscript is to provide brief guidance for intensive care unit management of mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 based on the literature and our direct experience with this population. PubMed, EBSCO, and the Cochrane Library were searched up until 15th of January 2021 for relevant literature.Expert opinion: Initially, the respiratory management of COVID-19 relied on the general therapeutic principles for acute respiratory distress syndrome; however, recent findings have suggested that the pathophysiology of hypoxemia in patients with COVID-19 presents specific features and changes over time. Several therapies, including antiviral and anti-inflammatory agents, have been proposed recently. The optimal intensive care unit management of patients with COVID-19 remains unclear; therefore, ongoing and future clinical trials are warranted to clarify the optimal strategies to adopt in this cohort of patients.

High-flow nasal cannula therapy for hypoxemic respiratory failure in patients with COVID-19

Introduction:

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy in patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 is poorly understood and remains controversial.

Methods:

We evaluated a large cohort of patients with COVID-19-related hypoxemic respiratory failure at the temporary COVID-19 hospital in Mexico City. The primary outcome was the success rate of HFNC to prevent the progression to invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). We also evaluated the risk factors associated with HFNC success or failure.

Results:

HFNC use effectively prevented IMV in 71.4% of patients [270 of 378 patients; 95% confidence interval (CI) 66.6–75.8%]. Factors that were significantly different at admission included age, the presence of hypertension, and the Charlson comorbidity index. Predictors of therapy failure (adjusted hazard ratio, 95% CI) included the comorbidity-age-lymphocyte count-lactate dehydrogenase (CALL) score at admission (1.27, 1.09–1.47; p < 0.01), Rox index at 1 hour (0.82, 0.7–0.96; p = 0.02), and no prior steroid treatment (0.34, 95% CI 0.19–0.62; p < 0.0001). Patients with HFNC success rarely required admission to the intensive care unit and had shorter lengths of hospital stay [19/270 (7.0%) and 15.0 (interquartile range, 11–20) days, respectively] than those who required IMV [104/108 (96.3%) and 26.5 (20–36) days, respectively].

Conclusion:

Treating patients with HFNC at admission led to improvement in respiratory parameters in many patients with COVID-19.

The Role of Noninvasive Respiratory Management in Patients with Severe COVID-19 Pneumonia

Acute hypoxemic respiratory failure is the principal cause of hospitalization, invasive mechanical ventilation and death in severe COVID-19 infection. Nearly half of intubated patients with COVID-19 eventually die. High-Flow Nasal Oxygen (HFNO) and Noninvasive Ventilation (NIV) constitute valuable tools to avert endotracheal intubation in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia who do not respond to conventional oxygen treatment. Sparing Intensive Care Unit beds and reducing intubation-related complications may save lives in the pandemic era. The main drawback of HFNO and/or NIV is intubation delay. Cautious selection of patients with severe hypoxemia due to COVID-19 disease, close monitoring and appropriate employment and titration of HFNO and/or NIV can increase the rate of success and eliminate the risk of intubation delay. At the same time, all precautions to protect the healthcare personnel from viral transmission should be taken. In this review, we summarize the evidence supporting the application of HFNO and NIV in severe COVID-19 hypoxemic respiratory failure, analyse the risks associated with their use and provide a path for their proper implementation.

High-Flow Nasal Cannula Treatment in Patients with COVID-19 Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: A Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Early use of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) decreases the need for endotracheal intubation (EI) in different respiratory failure causes. While HFNC is used in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) under weak recommendations, its efficacy remains to be investigated.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to examine HFNC efficacy in preventing EI among COVID-19 patients with AHRF. Secondary objectives were to determine predictors of HFNC success/failure, mortality rate, and length of hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) stay.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is a prospective cohort study conducted at a single tertiary care centre in Saudi Arabia from April to August 2020. Adult patients admitted to the ICU with AHRF secondary to COVID-19 pneumonia and managed with HFNC were included. We excluded patients who were intubated or managed with non-invasive ventilation before HFNC.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients received HFNC for a median duration of 3 days (interquartile range, 1-5 days). The mean age was 57 ± 14 years, and 86% were men. HFNC failure and EI occurred in 29 (66%) patients. Patients in whom HNFC treatment failed had a higher risk of death (52% versus 0%; P = 0.001). After adjusting for confounding factors, a high SOFA score and a low ROX index were significantly associated with HFNC failure (hazard ratio [HR], 1.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.93; P = 0.025; and HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.42-0.88; P = 0.008, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

One-third of hypoxemic COVID-19 patients who received HFNC did not require intubation. High SOFA score and low ROX index were associated with HFNC failure.

Awake Prone Positioning in Non-Intubated Patients With Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure Due to COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Awake prone positioning (APP) has been advocated to improve oxygenation and prevent intubation of patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This paper aims to synthesize the available evidence on the efficacy of APP.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of proportional outcomes from observational studies to compare intubation rate in patients treated with APP or with standard care.

RESULTS

A total of 46 published and 4 unpublished observational studies that included 2,994 subjects were included, of which 921 were managed with APP and 870 were managed with usual care. APP was associated with significant improvement of oxygenation parameters in 381 cases of 19 studies that reported this outcome. Among the 41 studies assessing intubation rates (870 subjects treated with APP and 852 subjects treated with usual care), the intubation rate was 27% (95% CI 19-37%) as compared to 30% (95% CI 20-42%) (P = .71), even when duration of application, use of adjunctive respiratory assist device (high-flow nasal cannula or noninvasive ventilation), and severity of oxygenation deficit were taken into account. There appeared to be a trend toward improved mortality when APP was compared with usual care (11% vs 22%), which was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

APP was associated with improvement of oxygenation but did not reduce the intubation rate in subjects with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19. This finding is limited by the high heterogeneity and the observational nature of included studies. Randomized controlled clinical studies are needed to definitively assess whether APP could improve key outcome such as intubation rate and mortality in these patients.

Non-invasive respiratory support paths in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: proposal of an algorithm

COVID-19 related Acute Respiratory Failure, may be successfully treated with Conventional Oxygen therapy, High Flow Nasal Cannula, Continuous Positive Airway Pressure or Bi-level Positive-Pressure ventilation. Despite the accumulated data in favor of the use of different Non-invasive Respiratory therapies in COVID-19 related Acute Respiratory Failure, it is not fully understood when start, escalate and de-escalate the best respiratory supportive option for the different timing of the disease. Based on the current published experience with Non-invasive Respiratory therapies in COVID-19 related Acute Respiratory Failure, we propose an algorithm in deciding when to start, when to stop and when to wean different NIRT. This strategy may help clinicians in better choosing NIRT during this second COVID-19 wave and beyond.

Non-invasive oxygenation strategies for respiratory failure with COVID-19: A concise narrative review of literature in pre and mid-COVID-19 era

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread globally and can cause a shortage of medical resources, in particular, mechanical ventilators. High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNC) and non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV) are frequently used for acute respiratory failure patients as alternatives to invasive mechanical ventilation. They are drawing attention because of a potential role to save mechanical ventilators. However, their effectiveness and risk of viral spread are unclear. The latest network meta-analysis of pre-COVID-19 trials reported that treatment with non-invasive oxygenation strategies was associated with improved survival when compared with conventional oxygen therapy. During the COVID-19 pandemic, a lot of clinical research on COVID-19 related acute respiratory failure has been reported. Several observational studies and small trials have suggested HFNC or NPPV as an alternative of standard oxygen therapy to manage COVID-19 related acute respiratory failure, provided that appropriate infection prevention is applied by health care workers to avoid risks of the virus transmission. Awake proning is an emerging strategy to optimise the management of patients with COVID-19 acute respiratory failure. However, the benefits of awake proning have yet to be assessed in properly designed clinical research. Although HFNC and NPPV are probably effective for acute respiratory failure, the safety data are mostly based on observational and experimental reports. As such, they should be implemented carefully if adequate personal protective equipment and negative pressure rooms are available.

Residual ground glass opacities three months after Covid-19 pneumonia correlate to alteration of respiratory function: The post Covid M3 study

Introduction

Lung function in survivors of SARS-Co-V2 pneumonia is poorly known, but concern over the possibility of sequelae exists.

Methods

Retrospective study on survivors with confirmed infection and pneumonia on chest-CT. Correlations between PFT and residual radiologic anomalies at three months taking into account initial clinical and radiological severity and steroid use during acute phase.

Results

137 patients (69 men, median age 59 (Q1 50; Q3 68), BMI 27.5 kg/m² (25.1; 31.7)) were assessed. Only 32.9% had normal PFT, 75 had altered DLCO. Median (Q1; Q3) values were: VC 79 (66; 92) % pred, FEV1 81 (68; 89), TLC 78 (67; 85), DLCO 60 (44; 72), and KCO 89 (77; 105). Ground glass opacities (GGO) were present in 103 patients (75%), reticulations in 42 (30%), and fibrosis in 18 (13%). There were significantly lower FEV1 (p = 0.0089), FVC (p = 0.0010), TLC (p < 0.0001) and DLCO (p < 0.0001) for patients with GGO, lower TLC (p = 0.0913) and DLCO (p = 0.0181) between patients with reticulations and lower FVC (p = 0.0618), TLC (p = 0.0742) DLCO (p = 0.002) and KCO (p = 0.0114) between patients with fibrosis. Patients with initial ≥50% lung involvement had significantly lower FEV1 (p = 0.0019), FVC (p = 0.0033), TLC (p = 0.0028) and DLCO (p = 0.0003) compared to patients with ≤10%. There was no difference in PFT and residual CT lesions between patients who received steroids and those who did not.

Conclusion

The majority of patients have altered PFT at three months, even in patients with mild initial disease, with significantly lower function in patients with residual CT lesions. Steroids do not seem to modify functional and radiological recovery. Long-term follow-up is needed.

Acute Responses to Oxygen Delivery via High Flow Nasal Cannula in Patients with Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease-HFNC and Severe COPD

Differences in oxygen delivery methods to treat hypoxemia have the potential to worsen CO₂ retention in chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD). Oxygen administration using high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has multiple physiological benefits in treating respiratory failure including reductions in PaCO₂ in a flow-dependent manner. We hypothesized that patients with COPD would develop worsening hypercapnia if oxygen fraction was increased without increasing flow rate. We evaluated the acute response to HFNC in subjects with severe COPD when flow remained constant and inspired oxygen was increased. In total, 11 subjects with severe COPD (FEV1 < 50%) on supplemental oxygen with baseline normocapnia (PaCO₂ < 45 mm Hg; n = 5) and hypercapnia (PaCO₂ ≥ 45 mm Hg; n = 6) were studied. Arterial blood gas responses were studied at three timepoints: Baseline, HFNC at a flow rate of 30 L/min at resting oxygen supplementation for 1 h, and FiO₂ 30% above baseline with the same flow rate for the next hour. The primary endpoint was the change in PaCO₂ from baseline. No significant changes in PaCO₂ were noted in response to HFNC applied at baseline FiO₂ in the normocapnic and hypercapnic group. At HFNC with FiO₂ 30% above baseline, the normocapnic group did not show a change in PaCO₂ (baseline: 38.9 ± 1.8 mm Hg; HFNC at higher FiO₂: 38.8 ± 3.1 mm Hg; p = 0.93), but the hypercapnic group demonstrated significant increase in PaCO₂ (baseline: 58.2 ± 9.3 mm Hg; HFNC at higher FiO₂: 63.3 ± 10.9 mm Hg; p = 0.025). We observed worsening hypercapnia in severe COPD patients and baseline hypercapnia who received increased oxygen fraction when flow remained constant. These data show the need for careful titration of oxygen therapy in COPD patients, particularly those with baseline hypercapnia when flow rate is unchanged.

Expert consensus statements for the management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure using a Delphi method

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused unprecedented pressure on healthcare system globally. Lack of high-quality evidence on the respiratory management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure (C-ARF) has resulted in wide variation in clinical practice.

METHODS

Using a Delphi process, an international panel of 39 experts developed clinical practice statements on the respiratory management of C-ARF in areas where evidence is absent or limited. Agreement was defined as achieved when > 70% experts voted for a given option on the Likert scale statement or > 80% voted for a particular option in multiple-choice questions. Stability was assessed between the two concluding rounds for each statement, using the non-parametric Chi-square (χ²) test (p < 0·05 was considered as unstable).

RESULTS

Agreement was achieved for 27 (73%) management strategies which were then used to develop expert clinical practice statements. Experts agreed that COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is clinically similar to other forms of ARDS. The Delphi process yielded strong suggestions for use of systemic corticosteroids for critical COVID-19; awake self-proning to improve oxygenation and high flow nasal oxygen to potentially reduce tracheal intubation; non-invasive ventilation for patients with mixed hypoxemic-hypercapnic respiratory failure; tracheal intubation for poor mentation, hemodynamic instability or severe hypoxemia; closed suction systems; lung protective ventilation; prone ventilation (for 16-24 h per day) to improve oxygenation; neuromuscular blocking agents for patient-ventilator dyssynchrony; avoiding delay in extubation for the risk of reintubation; and similar timing of tracheostomy as in non-COVID-19 patients. There was no agreement on positive end expiratory pressure titration or the choice of personal protective equipment.

CONCLUSION

Using a Delphi method, an agreement among experts was reached for 27 statements from which 20 expert clinical practice statements were derived on the respiratory management of C-ARF, addressing important decisions for patient management in areas where evidence is either absent or limited.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered with Clinical trials.gov Identifier: NCT04534569.

Expert consensus statements for the management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure using a Delphi method

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused unprecedented pressure on healthcare system globally. Lack of high-quality evidence on the respiratory management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure (C-ARF) has resulted in wide variation in clinical practice.

METHODS

Using a Delphi process, an international panel of 39 experts developed clinical practice statements on the respiratory management of C-ARF in areas where evidence is absent or limited. Agreement was defined as achieved when > 70% experts voted for a given option on the Likert scale statement or > 80% voted for a particular option in multiple-choice questions. Stability was assessed between the two concluding rounds for each statement, using the non-parametric Chi-square (χ²) test (p < 0·05 was considered as unstable).

RESULTS

Agreement was achieved for 27 (73%) management strategies which were then used to develop expert clinical practice statements. Experts agreed that COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is clinically similar to other forms of ARDS. The Delphi process yielded strong suggestions for use of systemic corticosteroids for critical COVID-19; awake self-proning to improve oxygenation and high flow nasal oxygen to potentially reduce tracheal intubation; non-invasive ventilation for patients with mixed hypoxemic-hypercapnic respiratory failure; tracheal intubation for poor mentation, hemodynamic instability or severe hypoxemia; closed suction systems; lung protective ventilation; prone ventilation (for 16-24 h per day) to improve oxygenation; neuromuscular blocking agents for patient-ventilator dyssynchrony; avoiding delay in extubation for the risk of reintubation; and similar timing of tracheostomy as in non-COVID-19 patients. There was no agreement on positive end expiratory pressure titration or the choice of personal protective equipment.

CONCLUSION

Using a Delphi method, an agreement among experts was reached for 27 statements from which 20 expert clinical practice statements were derived on the respiratory management of C-ARF, addressing important decisions for patient management in areas where evidence is either absent or limited.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered with Clinical trials.gov Identifier: NCT04534569.

Severe covid-19 pneumonia: pathogenesis and clinical management

Severe covid-19 pneumonia has posed critical challenges for the research and medical communities. Older age, male sex, and comorbidities increase the risk for severe disease. For people hospitalized with covid-19, 15-30% will go on to develop covid-19 associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (CARDS). Autopsy studies of patients who died of severe SARS CoV-2 infection reveal presence of diffuse alveolar damage consistent with ARDS but with a higher thrombus burden in pulmonary capillaries. When used appropriately, high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) may allow CARDS patients to avoid intubation, and does not increase risk for disease transmission. During invasive mechanical ventilation, low tidal volume ventilation and positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) titration to optimize oxygenation are recommended. Dexamethasone treatment improves mortality for the treatment of severe and critical covid-19, while remdesivir may have modest benefit in time to recovery in patients with severe disease but shows no statistically significant benefit in mortality or other clinical outcomes. Covid-19 survivors, especially patients with ARDS, are at high risk for long term physical and mental impairments, and an interdisciplinary approach is essential for critical illness recovery.

Cardiovascular Disease and Severe Hypoxemia Are Associated With Higher Rates of Noninvasive Respiratory Support Failure in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pneumonia

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Objectives:

Acute hypoxemic respiratory failure is the major complication of coronavirus disease 2019, yet optimal respiratory support strategies are uncertain. We aimed to describe outcomes with high-flow oxygen delivered through nasal cannula and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation in coronavirus disease 2019 acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and identify individual factors associated with noninvasive respiratory support failure.

Design:

Retrospective cohort study to describe rates of high-flow oxygen delivered through nasal cannula and/or noninvasive positive pressure ventilation success (live discharge without endotracheal intubation). Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard models were used to identify patient characteristics associated with high-flow oxygen delivered through nasal cannula and/or noninvasive positive pressure ventilation failure (endotracheal intubation and/or in-hospital mortality).

Setting:

One large academic health system, including five hospitals (one quaternary referral center, a tertiary hospital, and three community hospitals), in New York City.

Patients:

All hospitalized adults 18–100 years old with coronavirus disease 2019 admitted between March 1, 2020, and April 28, 2020.

Interventions:

None.

Measurements and Main Results:

A total of 331 and 747 patients received high-flow oxygen delivered through nasal cannula and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation as the highest level of noninvasive respiratory support, respectively; 154 (46.5%) in the high-flow oxygen delivered through nasal cannula cohort and 167 (22.4%) in the noninvasive positive pressure ventilation cohort were successfully discharged without requiring endotracheal intubation. In adjusted models, significantly increased risk of high-flow oxygen delivered through nasal cannula and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation failure was seen among patients with cardiovascular disease (subdistribution hazard ratio, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.17–2.83 and subdistribution hazard ratio, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.06–1.84, respectively). Conversely, a higher peripheral blood oxygen saturation to Fio₂ ratio at high-flow oxygen delivered through nasal cannula and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation initiation was associated with reduced risk of failure (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.19–0.54, and subdistribution hazard ratio 0.34; 95% CI, 0.21–0.55, respectively).

Conclusions:

A significant proportion of patients receiving noninvasive respiratory modalities for coronavirus disease 2019 acute hypoxemic respiratory failure achieved successful hospital discharge without requiring endotracheal intubation, with lower success rates among those with comorbid cardiovascular disease or more severe hypoxemia. The role of high-flow oxygen delivered through nasal cannula and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation in coronavirus disease 2019–related acute hypoxemic respiratory failure warrants further consideration.