Protocolized Postextubation Respiratory Support to Prevent Reintubation: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Peripheral perfusion index as a predictor of reintubation in critically ill surgical patients

PURPOSE

We aimed to evaluate the ability of the peripheral perfusion index (PPI) to predict reintubation of critically ill surgical patients.

METHODS

This prospective observational study included mechanically ventilated adults who were extubated after a successful spontaneous breathing trial (SBT). The patients were followed up for the next 48 h for the need for reintubation. The heart rate, systolic blood pressure, respiratory rate, peripheral arterial oxygen saturation (SpO2), and PPI were measured before-, at the end of SBT, 1 and 2 h postextubation. The primary outcome was the ability of PPI 1 h postextubation to predict reintubation using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) analysis. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify predictors for reintubation.

RESULTS

Data from 62 patients were analysed. Reintubation occurred in 12/62 (19%) of the patients. Reintubated patients had higher heart rate and respiratory rate; and lower SpO2 and PPI than successfully weaned patients. The AUC (95%confidence interval) for the ability of PPI at 1 h postextubation to predict reintubation was 0.82 (0.71-0.91) with a negative predictive value of 97%, at a cutoff value of ≤ 2.5. Low PPI and high respiratory rate were the independent predictors for reintubation.

CONCLUSION

PPI early after extubation is a useful tool for prediction of reintubation. Low PPI is an independent risk factor for reintubation. A PPI > 2.5, one hour after extubation can confirm successful extubation.

Building Learning Healthcare Systems for Critical Care Medicine

Learning healthcare systems are an evolving way of integrating informatics, analytics, and continuous improvement into daily practice in healthcare. This article discusses strategies to build learning healthcare systems for critical care medicine.

Effectiveness of high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) versus bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP) in preventing tracheal reintubation in patients with high risk of extubation failure in intensive care unit - A randomised comparative trial

Background and Aims

The incidence of tracheal extubation failure in high-risk patients is higher, and non-invasive ventilation is suggested to avoid tracheal reintubation. This study compares the effectiveness of bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP) and high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) to reduce the rate of reintubation in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with increased risk of extubation failure.

Methods

This randomised comparative trial was conducted on 60 high-risk patients on mechanical ventilators admitted to the ICU, ready for weaning after a spontaneous breathing trial. They were randomised to Group H for HFNC and Group B for BiPAP therapy. Designated therapy was administered in these high-risk patients for up to 48 hours after tracheal extubation. Haemodynamic parameters [mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR), a saturation of peripheral oxygen (SpO2), electrocardiogram (ECG)], arterial blood gas analysis (ABG) parameter [potential of hydrogen (pH), partial pressure of carbon dioxide (pCO2), partial pressure of oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen (paO2/FiO2) ratio], the effectiveness of cough, comfort level was recorded and continuous monitoring for signs of respiratory distress and failure was done.

Results

Most of the patients were obese and had more than two risk factors for extubation failure. Several patients in Group B have significantly higher successful extubation than in Group H (P = 0.044). Most of the reintubation took place within 24 hours. The HFNC therapy was more comfortable and acceptable to patients.

Conclusion

BiPAP therapy was more efficient than HFNC in preventing tracheal reintubation among patients with a high risk of extubation failure.

Personalized Noninvasive Respiratory Support in the Perioperative Setting: State of the Art and Future Perspectives

Background: Noninvasive respiratory support (NRS), including high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (HFNOT), noninvasive ventilation (NIV) and continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), are routinely used in the perioperative period. Objectives: This narrative review provides an overview on the perioperative use of NRS. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative respiratory support is discussed, along with potential future areas of research. Results: During induction of anesthesia, in selected patients at high risk of difficult intubation, NIV is associated with improved gas exchange and reduced risk of postoperative respiratory complications. HFNOT demonstrated an improvement in oxygenation. Evidence on the intraoperative use of NRS is limited. Compared with conventional oxygenation, HFNOT is associated with a reduced risk of hypoxemia during procedural sedation, and recent data indicate a possible role for HFNOT for intraoperative apneic oxygenation in specific surgical contexts. After extubation, "preemptive" NIV and HFNOT in unselected cohorts do not affect clinical outcome. Postoperative "curative" NIV in high-risk patients and among those exhibiting signs of respiratory failure can reduce reintubation rate, especially after abdominal surgery. Data on postoperative "curative" HFNOT are limited. Conclusions: There is increasing evidence on the perioperative use of NRS. Use of NRS should be tailored based on the patient's specific characteristics and type of surgery, aimed at a personalized cost-effective approach.

Effectiveness of high-flow nasal cannulae compared with noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation in preventing reintubation in patients receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation

Many intensive care unit patients who undergo endotracheal extubation experience extubation failure and require reintubation. Because of the high mortality rate associated with reintubation, postextubation respiratory management is crucial, especially for high-risk populations. We conducted the present study to compare the effectiveness of oxygen therapy administered using high-flow nasal cannulae (HFNC) and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) in preventing reintubation among patients receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation (PMV). This single-center, prospective, unblinded randomized controlled trial was at the respiratory care center (RCC). Participants were randomized to an HFNC group or an NIPPV group (20 patients in each) and received noninvasive respiratory support (NRS) administered using their assigned method. The primary outcome was reintubation within7 days after extubation. None of the patients in the NIPPV group required reintubation, whereas 5 (25%) of the patients in the HFNC group required reintubation (P = 0.047). The 90-day mortality rates of the NIPPV and HFNC groups (four patients [20%] vs. two patients [10%], respectively) did not differ significantly. No significant differences in length of RCC stay, length of hospital stay, time to liberation from NRS, and ventilator-free days at 28-day were identified. The time to event outcome analysis also revealed that the risk of reintubation in the HFNC group was higher than that in the NIPPV group (P = 0.018). Although HFNC is becoming increasingly common as a form of postextubation NRS, HFNC may not be as effective as NIPPV in preventing reintubation among patients who have been receiving PMV for at least 2 weeks. Additional studies evaluating HFNC as an alternative to NIPPV for patients receiving PMV are warranted.ClinicalTrial.gov ID: NCT04564859; IRB number: 20160901R.Trial registration: ClinicalTrial.gov ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04564859 ).

High-Flow Versus VenturiMask Oxygen Therapy to Prevent Reintubation in Hypoxemic Patients after Extubation: A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial

Rationale: When compared with VenturiMask after extubation, high-flow nasal oxygen provides physiological advantages. Objectives: To establish whether high-flow oxygen prevents endotracheal reintubation in hypoxemic patients after extubation, compared with VenturiMask. Methods: In this multicenter randomized trial, 494 patients exhibiting Pa_O2:Fi_O2 ratio ⩽ 300 mm Hg after extubation were randomly assigned to receive high-flow or VenturiMask oxygen, with the possibility to apply rescue noninvasive ventilation before reintubation. High-flow use in the VenturiMask group was not permitted. Measurements and Main Results: The primary outcome was the rate of reintubation within 72 hours according to predefined criteria, which were validated a posteriori by an independent adjudication committee. Main secondary outcomes included reintubation rate at 28 days and the need for rescue noninvasive ventilation according to predefined criteria. After intubation criteria validation (n = 492 patients), 32 patients (13%) in the high-flow group and 27 patients (11%) in the VenturiMask group required reintubation at 72 hours (unadjusted odds ratio, 1.26 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.70-2.26]; P = 0.49). At 28 days, the rate of reintubation was 21% in the high-flow group and 23% in the VenturiMask group (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.60-1.31]; P = 0.55). The need for rescue noninvasive ventilation was significantly lower in the high-flow group than in the VenturiMask group: at 72 hours, 8% versus 17% (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.22-0.71]; P = 0.002) and at 28 days, 12% versus 21% (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.32-0.83]; P = 0.007). Conclusions: Reintubation rate did not significantly differ between patients treated with VenturiMask or high-flow oxygen after extubation. High-flow oxygen yielded less frequent use of rescue noninvasive ventilation. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02107183).

Effect of postextubation noninvasive ventilation with active humidification vs high-flow nasal cannula on reintubation in patients at very high risk for extubation failure: a randomized trial

PURPOSE

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy was noninferior to noninvasive ventilation (NIV) for preventing reintubation in a heterogeneous population at high-risk for extubation failure. However, outcomes might differ in certain subgroups of patients. Thus, we aimed to determine whether NIV with active humidification is superior to HFNC in preventing reintubation in patients with ≥ 4 risk factors (very high risk for extubation failure).

METHODS

Randomized controlled trial in two intensive care units in Spain (June 2020‒June 2021). Patients ready for planned extubation with ≥ 4 of the following risk factors for reintubation were included: age > 65 years, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score > 12 on extubation day, body mass index > 30, inadequate secretions management, difficult or prolonged weaning, ≥ 2 comorbidities, acute heart failure indicating mechanical ventilation, moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, airway patency problems, prolonged mechanical ventilation, or hypercapnia on finishing the spontaneous breathing trial. Patients were randomized to undergo NIV with active humidification or HFNC for 48 h after extubation. The primary outcome was reintubation rate within 7 days after extubation. Secondary outcomes included postextubation respiratory failure, respiratory infection, sepsis, multiorgan failure, length of stay, mortality, adverse events, and time to reintubation.

RESULTS

Of 182 patients (mean age, 60 [standard deviation (SD), 15] years; 117 [64%] men), 92 received NIV and 90 HFNC. Reintubation was required in 21 (23.3%) patients receiving NIV vs 35 (38.8%) of those receiving HFNC (difference -15.5%; 95% confidence interval (CI) -28.3 to -1%). Hospital length of stay was lower in those patients treated with NIV (20 [12‒36.7] days vs 26.5 [15‒45] days, difference 6.5 [95%CI 0.5-21.1]). No additional differences in the other secondary outcomes were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Among adult critically ill patients at very high-risk for extubation failure, NIV with active humidification was superior to HFNC for preventing reintubation.

Identification and Prevention of Extubation Failure by Using an Automated Continuous Monitoring Alert Versus Standard Care

BACKGROUND

Postextubation monitoring helps identify patients at risk of developing respiratory failure. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of our standard respiratory therapist (RT) assessment tool versus an automated continuous monitoring alert to initiate postextubation RT-driven care on the re-intubation rate.

METHODS

This was a single-center randomized clinical trial from March 2020 to September 2021 of adult subjects who received mechanical ventilation for > 24 h and underwent planned extubation in the ICU. The subjects were assigned to the standard RT assessment tool or an automated monitoring alert to identify the need for postextubation RT-driven care. The primary outcome was the need for re-intubation due to respiratory failure within 72 h. Secondary outcomes included re-intubation within 7 d, ICU and hospital lengths of stay, hospital mortality, ICU cost, and RT time associated with patient assessment and therapy provision.

RESULTS

Of 234 randomized subjects, 32 were excluded from the primary analysis due to disruption in RT-driven care during the surge of patients with COVID-19, and 1 subject was excluded due to delay in the automated monitoring initiation. Analysis of the primary outcome included 85 subjects assigned to the standard RT assessment group and 116 assigned to the automated monitoring alert group to initiate RT-driven care. There was no significant difference between the study groups in re-intubation rate, median length of stay, mortality, or ICU costs. The RT time associated with patient assessment (P < .001) and therapy provided (P = .031) were significantly lower in the automated continuous monitoring alert group.

CONCLUSIONS

In subjects who received mechanical ventilation for > 24 h, there were no significant outcome or cost differences between our standard RT assessment tool or an automated monitoring alert to initiate postextubation RT-driven care. Using an automated continuous monitoring alert to initiate RT-driven care saved RT time. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT04231890).

Benefit with preventive noninvasive ventilation in subgroups of patients at high-risk for reintubation: a post hoc analysis

Background

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) was shown to be non-inferior to noninvasive ventilation (NIV) for preventing reintubation in a general population of high-risk patients. However, some subgroups of high-risk patients might benefit more from NIV. We aimed to determine whether the presence of many risk factors or overweight (body mass index (BMI) ≥ 25 kg/m2) patients could have different response to any preventive therapy, NIV or HFNC in terms of reduced reintubation rate.

Methods

Not pre-specified post hoc analysis of a multicentre, randomized, controlled, non-inferiority trial comparing NFNC and NIV to prevent reintubation in patients at risk for reintubation. The original study included patients with at least 1 risk factor for reintubation.

Results

Among 604 included in the original study, 148 had a BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2. When adjusting for potential covariates, patients with ≥ 4 risk factors (208 patients) presented a higher risk for reintubation (OR 3.4 [95%CI 2.16–5.35]). Patients with ≥ 4 risk factors presented lower reintubation rates when treated with preventive NIV (23.9% vs 45.7%; P = 0.001). The multivariate analysis of overweight patients, adjusted for covariates, did not present a higher risk for reintubation (OR 1.37 [95%CI 0.82–2.29]). However, those overweight patients presented an increased risk for reintubation when treated with preventive HFNC (OR 2.47 [95%CI 1.18–5.15]).

Conclusions

Patients with ≥ 4 risk factors for reintubation may benefit more from preventive NIV. Based on this result, HFNC may not be the optimal preventive therapy in overweight patients. Specific trials are needed to confirm these results.

Prediction Model of Extubation Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study

Liberation from mechanical ventilation is of great importance owing to related complications from extended ventilation time. In this prospective multicenter study, we aimed to construct a versatile model for predicting extubation outcomes in critical care settings using obtainable physiological predictors. The study included patients who had been extubated after a successful 30 min spontaneous breathing trial (SBT). A multivariable logistic regression model was constructed to predict extubation outcomes (successful extubation without reintubation and uneventful extubation without reintubation or noninvasive respiratory support) using eight parameters: age, heart failure, respiratory disease, rapid shallow breathing index (RSBI), PaO2/FIO2, Glasgow Coma Scale score, fluid balance, and endotracheal suctioning episodes. Of 499 patients, 453 (90.8%) and 328 (65.7%) achieved successful and uneventful extubation, respectively. The areas under the curve for successful and uneventful extubation in the novel prediction model were 0.69 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.62−0.77) and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.65−0.74), respectively, which were significantly higher than those in the conventional model solely using RSBI (0.58 (95% CI, 0.50−0.66) and 0.54 (95% CI, 0.49−0.60), p = 0.004 and <0.001, respectively). The model was validated using a bootstrap method, and an online application was developed for automatic calculation. Our model, which is based on a combination of generally obtainable parameters, established an accessible method for predicting extubation outcomes after a successful SBT.

Noninvasive respiratory support following extubation in critically ill adults: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Systematic review and network meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy of noninvasive respiratory strategies, including noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) and high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC), in reducing extubation failure among critically ill adults.

METHODS

We searched databases from inception through October 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating noninvasive respiratory support therapies (NIPPV, HFNC, conventional oxygen therapy, or a combination of these) following extubation in critically ill adults. Two reviewers performed screening, full text review, and extraction independently. The primary outcome of interest was reintubation. We used GRADE to rate the certainty of our findings.

RESULTS

We included 36 RCTs (6806 patients). Compared to conventional oxygen therapy, NIPPV (OR 0.65 [95% CI 0.52-0.82]) and HFNC (OR 0.63 [95% CI 0.45-0.87]) reduced reintubation (both moderate certainty). Sensitivity analyses showed that the magnitude of the effect was highest in patients with increased baseline risk of reintubation. As compared to HFNC, no difference in incidence of reintubation was seen with NIPPV (OR 1.04 [95% CI 0.78-1.38], low certainty). Compared to conventional oxygen therapy, neither NIPPV (OR 0.8 [95% CI 0.61-1.04], moderate certainty) or HFNC (OR 0.9 [95% CI 0.66-1.24], low certainty) reduced short-term mortality. Consistent findings were demonstrated across multiple subgroups, including high- and low-risk patients. These results were replicated when evaluating noninvasive strategies for prevention (prophylaxis), but not in rescue (application only after evidence of deterioration) situations.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that both NIPPV and HFNC reduced reintubation in critically ill adults, compared to conventional oxygen therapy. NIPPV did not reduce incidence of reintubation when compared to HFNC. These findings support the preventative application of noninvasive respiratory support strategies to mitigate extubation failure in critically ill adults, but not in rescue conditions.

The Respiratory Rate-Oxygenation Index predicts failure of post-extubation high-flow nasal cannula therapy in intensive care unit patients: a retrospective cohort study

Objective

To investigate the applicability of the Respiratory Rate-Oxygenation Index to identify the risk of high-flow nasal cannula failure in post-extubation pneumonia patients.

Methods

This was a 2-year retrospective observational study conducted in a reference hospital in Bogotá, Colombia. All patients in whom post-extubation high-flow nasal cannula therapy was used as a bridge to extubation were included in the study. The Respiratory Rate-Oxygenation Index was calculated to assess the risk of post-extubation high-flow nasal cannula failure.

Results

A total of 162 patients were included in the study. Of these, 23.5% developed high-flow nasal cannula failure. The Respiratory Rate-Oxygenation Index was significantly lower in patients who had high-flow nasal cannula failure [median (IQR): 10.0 (7.7 - 14.4) versus 12.6 (10.1 - 15.6); p = 0.006]. Respiratory Rate-Oxygenation Index > 4.88 showed a crude OR of 0.23 (95%CI 0.17 - 0.30) and an adjusted OR of 0.89 (95%CI 0.81 - 0.98) stratified by severity and comorbidity. After logistic regression analysis, the Respiratory Rate-Oxygenation Index had an adjusted OR of 0.90 (95%CI 0.82 - 0.98; p = 0.026). The area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve for extubation failure was 0.64 (95%CI 0.53 - 0.75; p = 0.06). The Respiratory Rate-Oxygenation Index did not show differences between patients who survived and those who died during the intensive care unit stay.

Conclusion

The Respiratory Rate-Oxygenation Index is an accessible tool to identify patients at risk of failing high-flow nasal cannula post-extubation treatment. Prospective studies are needed to broaden the utility in this scenario.