High-Flow Nasal Cannula May Not Reduce the Re-Intubation Rate Compared With a Large-Volume Nebulization-Based Humidifier

Tools used to assess comfort among patients undergoing high flow nasal cannula: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

The aims were twofold: (a) to map tools documented in the literature to evaluate comfort among patients undergoing high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) treatment; and (b) to assess if the retrieved tools have been validated for this purpose.

METHODS

A scoping review, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). In July 2023, PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL and Cochrane Library were consulted. Studies assessing comfort in adult, paediatric, and neonatal patients undergoing HFNC were included.

RESULTS

Seventy-four articles were included, among which nine (12.2 %) investigated comfort as the primary aim. Twenty-five different tools were found, classifiable into 14 types, mostly unidimensional and originating from those measuring pain. The most widely used was the Visual Analogic Scale (n = 27, 35.6 %) followed by the Numerical Rating Scale (n = 11, 14.5 %) and less defined generic tools (n = 10, 13.2 %) with different metrics (e.g. 0-5, 0-10, 0-100). Only the General Comfort Questionnaire and the Comfort Scale were specifically validated for the assessment of comfort among adults and children, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Although the comfort of patients undergoing HFNC is widely investigated in the literature, there is a scarcity of tools specifically validated in this field. Those used have been validated mainly to assess pain, suggesting the need to inform patients to prevent confusion while measuring comfort during HFNC and to develop more research in the field.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE

Comfort assessment is an important aspect of nursing care. Given the lack of validation studies in the field, efforts in research are recommended.

Predictive value of fluid balance before extubation on its outcome in mechanically ventilated adults in the intensive care unit

BACKGROUND

Although there are many reasons for extubation failure, maintaining negative or lower positive fluid balances 24 hours before extubation may be a key measure for successful extubation.

AIM

To assess the predictive value of fluid balance before extubation and its outcome in mechanically ventilated cases in the intensive care unit (ICU).

STUDY DESIGN

This retrospective cohort study involved collecting clinical data from patients undergoing mechanical ventilation in Lanzhou general adult ICU from January 2022 to December 2022. Based on extubation outcomes, the patients were divided into a successful extubation group and a failed extubation group. Their fluid balance levels 24 h before extubation were compared with analyse the predictive value of fluid balance on extubation outcomes in patients undergoing mechanical ventilation.

RESULTS

In this study, clinical data from 545 patients admitted to a general adult ICU were collected. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 265 (48.6%) patients were included, of which 197 (74.3%) were successfully extubated; extubation was unsuccessful in 68 (25.7%) patients. The total intake and fluid balance levels in patients in the failed extubation group 24 h before extubation were significantly higher than those in the successful extubation group, with a median of 2679.00 (2410.44-3193.50) mL versus 2435.40 (1805.04-2957.00) mL, 831.50 (26.25-1407.94) mL versus 346.00 (-163.00-941.50) mL. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis showed that the optimal cut-off value for predicting extubation outcomes was 497.5 mL (sensitivity 64.7%, specificity 59.4%) for fluid balance 24 h before extubation. The area under the ROC curve was 0.627 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.547-0.707). Based on the logistic regression model, cumulative fluid balance >497.5 mL 24 h before extubation could predict its outcomes in mechanically ventilated patients in the ICU (OR = 5.591, 95% CI [2.402-13.015], p < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The fluid balance level 24 h before extubation was correlated with the outcome of extubation in mechanically ventilated patients in the ICU. The risk of extubation failure was higher when the fluid balance level was >497.5 mL.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Tracheal intubation is a crucial life support technique for many critically ill patients, and determining the appropriate time for extubation remains a challenge for clinicians. Although there are many reasons for extubation failure, acute pulmonary oedema caused by continuous positive fluid balance and volume overload is one of the main reasons for extubation failure. Therefore, it is very important to study the relationship between fluid balance and extubation outcome to improve the prognosis of patients with invasive mechanical ventilation in ICU.

Impact of different oxygen therapy strategies on the risk of endotracheal reintubation in mechanically ventilated patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Mechanical ventilation (MV) is a crucial intervention for the support of patients with acute and severe respiratory failure in modern intensive care medicine. However, the mechanical forces resulting from the interplay between the ventilator and the respiratory system may cause pulmonary injury.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy and other oxygen therapy modalities on the risk of endotracheal reintubation in mechanically ventilated patients after extubation in the intensive care unit (ICU).

METHODS

An electronic search was carried out across various databases including PubMed, Embase, Ovid, Medline, Cochrane Library, Embase, VIP, and Wanfang. The objective of this search was to locate prospective randomized controlled trials that examined the effects of multiple oxygen therapy approaches on the incidence of reintubation in patients in the ICU after undergoing mechanical ventilation. The meta package in R language was used to analyze parameters adopted by the included studies such as reintubation rate, mortality rate, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

This study enrolled 22 articles, involving 4,160 participants, with 2,061 in the study group and 2,099 in the control group. Among these, 20 articles presented data on the reintubation rate of the patients included with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.74, 1.09) for HFNC and an OR of 1.77 (95% CI: 0.93, 3.38) for HFNC in the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) subgroup. Moreover, 10 articles assessed the incidence of respiratory failure after extubation, revealing an OR for HFNC was 0.68 (95% CI: 0.55, 0.84) using a fixed-effects model. Nine articles addressed ICU mortality, while 13 pieces of literature examined hospital mortality. HFNC showed no significant impact on either ICU mortality or hospital mortality.

CONCLUSION

HFNC therapy markedly reduces the incidence of respiratory failure in mechanically ventilated patients following extubation in the ICU. Furthermore, it specifically reduces the risk of reintubation in patients diagnosed with COPD.

Noninvasive respiratory support after extubation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The effect of noninvasive respiratory support (NRS), including high-flow nasal oxygen, bi-level positive airway pressure and continuous positive airway pressure (noninvasive ventilation (NIV)), for preventing and treating post-extubation respiratory failure is still unclear. Our objective was to assess the effects of NRS on post-extubation respiratory failure, defined as re-intubation secondary to post-extubation respiratory failure (primary outcome). Secondary outcomes included the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), discomfort, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital mortality, ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS), and time to re-intubation. Subgroup analyses considered "prophylactic" versus "therapeutic" NRS application and subpopulations (high-risk, low-risk, post-surgical and hypoxaemic patients).

METHODS

We undertook a systematic review and network meta-analysis (Research Registry: reviewregistry1435). PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, Scopus and Web of Science were searched (from inception until 22 June 2022). Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the use of NRS after extubation in ICU adult patients were included.

RESULTS

32 RCTs entered the quantitative analysis (5063 patients). Compared with conventional oxygen therapy, NRS overall reduced re-intubations and VAP (moderate certainty). NIV decreased hospital mortality (moderate certainty), and hospital and ICU LOS (low and very low certainty, respectively), and increased discomfort (moderate certainty). Prophylactic NRS did not prevent extubation failure in low-risk or hypoxaemic patients.

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic NRS may reduce the rate of post-extubation respiratory failure in ICU patients.

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.

ERS Clinical Practice Guidelines: High-flow nasal cannula in acute respiratory failure

BACKGROUND

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has become a frequently used non-invasive form of respiratory support in acute settings, however evidence supporting its use has only recently emerged. These guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations for the use of HFNC alongside other noninvasive forms of respiratory support in adults with acute respiratory failure (ARF).

MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY

The European Respiratory Society Task Force panel included expert clinicians and methodologists in pulmonology and intensive care medicine. The Task Force used the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) methods to summarize evidence and develop clinical recommendations for the use of HFNC alongside conventional oxygen therapy (COT) and non-invasive ventilation (NIV) for the management of adults in acute settings with ARF.

RESULTS

The Task Force developed 8 conditional recommendations, suggesting using: 1) HFNC over COT in hypoxemic ARF, 2) HFNC over NIV in hypoxemic ARF, 3)HFNC over COT during breaks from NIV, 4) either HFNC or COT in post-operative patients at low risk of pulmonary complications, 5) either HFNC or NIV in post-operative patients at high risk of pulmonary complications, 6) HFNC over COT in non-surgical patients at low risk of extubation failure, 7) NIV over HFNC for patients at high risk of extubation failure unless there are relative or absolute contraindications to NIV, 8) trialling NIV prior to use of HFNC in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and hypercapnic ARF.

CONCLUSIONS

HFNC is a valuable intervention in adults with ARF. These conditional recommendations can assist clinicians in choosing the most appropriate form of non-invasive respiratory support to provide to patients in different acute settings.

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

BACKGROUND

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

PURPOSE

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

DATA SOURCES

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

STUDY SELECTION

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

DATA EXTRACTION

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

DATA SYNTHESIS

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

LIMITATIONS

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

CONCLUSION

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

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

American College of Physicians. (PROSPERO: CRD42019146691).

Appropriate Use of High-Flow Nasal Oxygen in Hospitalized Patients for Initial or Postextubation Management of Acute Respiratory Failure: A Clinical Guideline From the American College of Physicians

DESCRIPTION

The American College of Physicians (ACP) developed this guideline to provide clinical recommendations on the appropriate use of high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) in hospitalized patients for initial or postextubation management of acute respiratory failure. It is based on the best available evidence on the benefits and harms of HFNO, taken in the context of costs and patient values and preferences.

METHODS

The ACP Clinical Guidelines Committee based these recommendations on a systematic review on the efficacy and safety of HFNO. The patient-centered health outcomes evaluated included all-cause mortality, hospital length of stay, 30-day hospital readmissions, hospital-acquired pneumonia, days of intubation or reintubation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and ICU transfers, patient comfort, dyspnea, delirium, barotrauma, compromised nutrition, gastric dysfunction, functional independence at discharge, discharge disposition, and skin breakdown. This guideline was developed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) method.

TARGET AUDIENCE AND PATIENT POPULATION

The target audience is all clinicians, and the target patient population is adult patients with acute respiratory failure treated in a hospital setting (including emergency departments, hospital wards, intermediate or step-down units, and ICUs).

RECOMMENDATION 1A

ACP suggests that clinicians use high-flow nasal oxygen rather than noninvasive ventilation in hospitalized adults for the management of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 1B

ACP suggests that clinicians use high-flow nasal oxygen rather than conventional oxygen therapy for hospitalized adults with postextubation acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence).

Post-extubation oxygenation strategies in acute respiratory failure: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background

High-flow nasal cannula oxygenation (HFNC) and noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NPPV) possibly decrease tracheal reintubation rates better than conventional oxygen therapy (COT); however, few large-scale studies have compared HFNC and NPPV. We conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the effectiveness of three post-extubation respiratory support devices (HFNC, NPPV, and COT) in reducing the mortality and reintubation risk.

Methods

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Ichushi databases were searched. COT, NPPV, and HFNC use were assessed in patients who were aged ≥ 16 years, underwent invasive mechanical ventilation for > 12 h for acute respiratory failure, and were scheduled for extubation after spontaneous breathing trials. The GRADE Working Group Approach was performed using a frequentist-based approach with multivariate random-effect meta-analysis. Short-term mortality and reintubation and post-extubation respiratory failure rates were compared.

Results

After evaluating 4631 records, 15 studies and 2600 patients were included. The main cause of acute hypoxic respiratory failure was pneumonia. Although NPPV/HFNC use did not significantly lower the mortality risk (relative risk [95% confidence interval] 0.75 [0.53–1.06] and 0.92 [0.67–1.27]; low and moderate certainty, respectively), HFNC use significantly lowered the reintubation risk (0.54 [0.32–0.89]; high certainty) compared to COT use. The associations of mortality with NPPV and HFNC use with respect to either outcome did not differ significantly (short-term mortality and reintubation, relative risk [95% confidence interval] 0.81 [0.61–1.08] and 1.02 [0.53–1.97]; moderate and very low certainty, respectively).

Conclusion

NPPV or HFNC use may not reduce the risk of short-term mortality; however, they may reduce the risk of endotracheal reintubation.

Trial registration number and date of registration

PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42020139112, 01/21/2020).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-021-03550-4.

Impact of frailty on protocol-based weaning from mechanical ventilation in patients with sepsis: a retrospective cohort study

Aim

Frailty has been shown to be associated with prolonged mechanical ventilation (MV). However, due to limited physiological data, it has been unclear how frailty affects weaning from MV in septic patients subjected to a specific weaning protocol.

Methods

This was a single‐center retrospective cohort study. The study included patients with sepsis on MV who underwent protocol‐based weaning between August 2015 and December 2018. Frailty was defined as a Clinical Frailty Scale score 4 or more. The association between frailty and weaning was evaluated.

Results

Ninety‐nine eligible patients were identified and categorized as frail (n = 67) or not frail (n = 32). The duration of MV was significantly longer in the frail group (8 days versus 5 days, P < 0.01). In multivariate analysis, frailty was independently associated with duration of MV (regression coefficient 17.97, 95% confidence interval 1.77–34.17) and successful weaning (hazard ratio 0.60, 95% confidence interval 0.36–1.00). There was no significant between‐group difference in duration until the first separation attempt or reintubation rate. Respiratory failure was significantly more common in the frail group as a cause of weaning failure, whereas airway failure was common in both groups.

Conclusion

Frailty was independently associated with a longer duration of MV in patients with sepsis who underwent protocol‐based weaning. Frail patients were more likely to fail spontaneous breathing trials than nonfrail patients during the weaning process, although the risk after extubation was similar.