When Conventional Oxygen Therapy Fails-The Effectiveness of High-Flow Nasal Oxygen Therapy in Patients with Respiratory Failure in the Course of COVID-19

Unpacking the Complexity of COVID-19 Fatalities: Adverse Events as Contributing Factors-A Single-Center, Retrospective Analysis of the First Two Years of the Pandemic

In a retrospective analysis of 477 fatal COVID-19 cases hospitalised at a single medical centre during the period from 6 March 2020 to 30 June 2022, several factors defining those patients at admission were assessed, as well as the course of the hospitalisation and factors contributing to death. There was a predominance of men (59.3% (283)) burdened by comorbidities, with increased inflammation at admission. Patients aged ≥ 81 years were significantly more likely to be admitted to and die in infectious diseases units (IDU) due to respiratory failure, their hospital stays were shorter, and they were most likely not to receive specialist treatment. The most common COVID-19 complications included acute kidney injury in 31.2% (149) patients and thromboembolic complications in 23.5% (112). The course of hospitalisation was complicated by healthcare-associated infections (HAI) in 33.3% (159) of cases, more often in those treated with baricitinib (p < 0.001). The initial use of an antibiotic, although common (94.8% (452)), was unwarranted in almost half of the cases (47.6% (215)). Complications of hospitalisation (46.1% (220)) and adverse events involving staff (49.7% (237)) were found in almost half of the patients. In 88.7% (423) of the cases, death was due to respiratory failure in the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Adverse events during hospitalisation should be considered as an additional factor that, in addition to the infection itself, may have influenced the death of patients.

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.

The Course of COVID-19 in Patients with Systemic Autoimmune Rheumatic Diseases

Patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease (SARD) have increased susceptibility to viral infections, including SARS-CoV-2. The aim of this study was to analyse the SARD patient population with COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) in terms of baseline characteristics, severity, course and outcomes of the disease compared with the non-SARD group, and to identify factors associated with prognosis, including remdesivir therapy efficacy. Retrospective study comprised 8220 COVID-19 cases from the SARSTer database, including 185 with SARD. Length of hospitalisation, duration of oxygen therapy, mortality and the need for HFNO (high-flow nasal oxygen) and/or NIV (noninvasive ventilation) were significantly higher in the SARD versus non-SARD group. There was no difference in clinical features on admission to hospital. Patients with SARD were older and more likely to have cardiovascular, pulmonary and chronic kidney diseases. Age, the presence of cardiovascular disease, more severe conditions on admission and higher inflammatory marker values were found to be risk factors for death in the SARD group. In patients with SARD treated with remdesivir, there was a trend towards improved mortality but without statistical significance. Length of hospitalisation, 28-day mortality and the need for HFNO and/or NIV were higher in the SARD group. These patients often had other chronic diseases and were older.

Noninvasive Respiratory Assist Devices in the Management of COVID-19-related Hypoxic Respiratory Failure: Pune ISCCM COVID-19 ARDS Study Consortium (PICASo)

Objective

To determine whether high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) or noninvasive ventilator (NIV) can avoid invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ADRS), and the outcome predictors of these modalities.

Design

Multicenter retrospective study conducted in 12 ICUs in Pune, India.

Patients

Patients with COVID-19 pneumonia who had PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio <150 and were treated with HFNO and/or NIV.

Intervention

HFNO and/or NIV.

Measurements

The primary outcome was to assess the need of IMV. Secondary outcomes were death at Day 28 and mortality rates in different treatment groups.

Main results

Among 1,201 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 35.9% (431/1,201) were treated successfully with HFNO and/or NIV and did not require IMV. About 59.5% (714/1,201) patients needed IMV for the failure of HFNO and/or NIV. About 48.3, 61.6, and 63.6% of patients who were treated with HFNO, NIV, or both, respectively, needed IMV. The need of IMV was significantly lower in the HFNO group (p <0.001). The 28-day mortality was 44.9, 59.9, and 59.6% in the patients treated with HFNO, NIV, or both, respectively (p <0.001). On multivariate regression analysis, presence of any comorbidity, SpO₂ <90%, and presence of nonrespiratory organ dysfunction were independent and significant determinants of mortality (p <0.05).

Conclusions

During COVID-19 pandemic surge, HFNO and/or NIV could successfully avoid IMV in 35.5% individuals with PO₂/FiO₂ ratio <150. Those who needed IMV due to failure of HFNO or NIV had high (87.5%) mortality.

How to cite this article

Jog S, Zirpe K, Dixit S, Godavarthy P, Shahane M, Kadapatti K, et al. Noninvasive Respiratory Assist Devices in the Management of COVID-19-related Hypoxic Respiratory Failure: Pune ISCCM COVID-19 ARDS Study Consortium (PICASo). Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(7):791-797.

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.