Reduction of PaCO2 by high-flow nasal cannula in acute hypercapnic respiratory failure patients receiving conventional oxygen therapy

Comparison of preoxygenation with a high-flow nasal cannula and a simple face mask before intubation in Korean patients with head and neck cancer

BACKGROUND

Although preoxygenation is an essential procedure for safe endotracheal intubation, in some cases securing sufficient time for tracheal intubation may not be possible. Patients with head and neck cancer might have a difficult airway and need a longer time for endotracheal intubation. We hypothesized that the extended apneic period with preoxygenation via a high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is beneficial to patients who undergo head and neck surgery compared with preoxygenation with a simple mask.

METHODS

The study was conducted as a single-center, single-blinded, prospective, randomized controlled trial. Patients were divided into groups based on one of the two preoxygenation.

METHODS

HFNC group or simple facemask (mask group). Preoxygenation was performed for 5 minutes with each method, and endotracheal intubation for all patients was performed using a video laryngoscope. Oxygen partial pressures of the arterial blood were compared at the predefined time points.

RESULTS

For the primary outcome, the mean arterial oxygen partial pressure (PaO2 ) immediately after intubation was 454.2 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI], 416.9-491.5 mm Hg) in the HFNC group and 370.7 mm Hg (95% CI, 333.7-407.4 mm Hg) in the mask group (P=0.002). The peak PaO2 at 5 minutes after preoxygenation was not statistically different between the groups (P=0.355).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoxygenation with a HFNC extending to the apneic period before endotracheal intubation may be beneficial in patients with head and neck cancer.

Delivery of Aerosolized Bronchodilators by High-Flow Nasal Cannula During COPD Exacerbation

BACKGROUND

Bronchodilator delivery via a high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has generated interest in recent years. The efficacy of in-line vibrating mesh nebulizers with an HFNC during COPD exacerbation is limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical response of subjects with COPD exacerbation who require bronchodilator therapy (anticholinergic and β-agonist) by using a vibrating mesh nebulizer in line with an HFNC.

METHODS

This was a prospective single-center study performed in a respiratory intermediate care unit that enrolled patients with a diagnosis of COPD exacerbation who required noninvasive ventilation on admission. All the subjects underwent noninvasive ventilation breaks with an HFNC. After clinical stability, pulmonary function tests were performed to assess changes in FEV1 and clinical parameters before and after bronchodilation by using a vibrating mesh nebulizer in line with an HFNC.

RESULTS

Forty-six patients with COPD exacerbation were admitted. Five patients who did not use noninvasive ventilation and 10 patients who did not receive bronchodilator treatment with a vibrating mesh nebulizer were excluded. Thirty-one were selected, but 1 subject was secondarily excluded due to loss of data. Finally, 30 subjects were included. The primary outcome was spirometric changes in FEV1. The mean ± SD FEV1 before receiving bronchodilator treatment by using a vibrating mesh nebulizer in line with an HFNC was 0.74 ± 0.10 L, and, after receiving treatment, the mean ± SD FEV1 changed to 0.88 ± 0.12 L (P < .001). Similarly, the mean ± SD FVC increased from 1.75 ± 0.54 L to 2.13 ± 0.63 L (P < .001). Considerable differences were observed in breathing frequency and heart rate after receiving bronchodilator treatment. No relevant changes were observed in the Borg scale or Sp O2 after treatment. The mean clinical stability recorded was 4 d.

CONCLUSIONS

In subjects with COPD exacerbation, bronchodilator treatment by using a vibrating mesh nebulizer in line with an HFNC showed a mild but significant improvement in FEV1 and FVC. In addition, a decrease in breathing frequency was observed, suggesting a reduction in dynamic hyperinflation.

Efficacy and safety of high-flow nasal cannula therapy in elderly patients with acute respiratory failure

INTRODUCTION

To assess the efficacy and safety of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) in elderly patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF) not due to COVID-19, refractory to treatment with conventional oxygen therapy and/or intolerant to noninvasive ventilation (NIV) or continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and without criteria for admission to intensive care units (ICU).

METHODS

Prospective observational study of patients with ARF treated with HFNC who presented clinical and arterial blood gas deterioration after 24 h of medical treatment and oxygenation by conventional systems. The degree of dyspnoea, gas exchange parameters (arterial O2 pressure/inspired O2 fraction ratio (PaO2/FiO2); oxygen saturation measured by oximetry/ inspired fraction of oxygen (Sp02/Fi02), ROX index), degree of patient tolerance and mortality were evaluated. These were measured at discharge from the emergency department (ED), 24 h after treatment with conventional oxygenation and 60, 120 min and 24 h after initiation of HFNC. The results were analyzed for all patients as a whole and for patients with hypercapnia (arterial carbon dioxide tension (PaCO2) < 45 mmHg) separately.

RESULTS

200 patients were included in the study between November 2019 and November 2020, with a mean age of 83 years, predominantly women (61.9%), obese (Body Mass Index (BMI) 31.1), with high comorbidity (Charlson index 4) and mild-moderate degree of dependence (Barthel 60). A number of 128 patients (64%) were hypercapnic. None had respiratory acidosis (pH 7.39). Evaluation at 60 min, 120 min and 24 h showed significant improvement in all patients and in the subgroup of hypercapnic patients with respect to baseline parameters in respiratory rate (RR), dyspnoea, ROX index, PaO2/FiO2, SpO2/FiO2 and patient comfort. No changes in PaCO2 or level of consciousness were observed. HFNC was well tolerated. Ten patients (5%) died due to progression of the disease causing ARF.

CONCLUSIONS

HFNC is an effective and safe alternative in elderly patients with ARF not due to COVID-19, refractory to treatment with conventional oxygen therapy and/or intolerant to NIV or CPAP and without criteria for admission to ICU.

The efficacy of high-flow oxygen versus conventional oxygen for asthma control: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

Introduction

The efficacy of high-flow oxygen versus conventional oxygen therapy for asthma control remains controversial.

Aim

This meta-analysis aims to explore the influence of high-flow oxygen versus conventional oxygen therapy on asthma control.

Material and methods

We have searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases, and included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of high-flow oxygen versus conventional oxygen therapy for asthma control.

Results

Four RCTs are included in this meta-analysis. Overall, compared with conventional oxygen therapy for asthma, high-flow oxygen is associated with a significantly lower dyspnoea score (standard mean difference (SMD) = -0.63; 95% confidence interval (CI): -1.08 to -0.17; p = 0.008), but reveals no remarkable influence on PaCO₂ (SMD = 0.28; 95% CI: -0.22 to 0.77; p = 0.28), PaO₂ (SMD = 0.44; 95% CI: -1.34 to 2.22; p = 0.63), intubation rate (OR = 1.09; 95% CI: 0.15 to 8.21; p = 0.93) or hospital length of stay (SMD = -0.07; 95% CI: -0.41 to 0.27; p = 0.67).

Conclusions

High-flow oxygen may benefit to reduce/may be more beneficial in reducing the dyspnoea score than conventional oxygen therapy for asthma, but shows no improvement in PaCO₂, PaO₂, intubation or hospital length of stay.

Comparison of Conventional Oxygen Therapy With High-Flow Nasal Oxygenation in the Management of Hypercapnic Respiratory Failure

Introduction: The effectiveness of high-flow nasal oxygenation (HFNO) in patients with hypercapnic respiratory failure (RF) remains controversial. The current study compared the effectiveness of HFNO in patients with hypercapnic RF with conventional oxygen therapy (COT).

Objectives: The primary objective was to compare changes in the partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2) between those receiving COT and HFNO. The secondary objectives were to compare changes in the partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), oxygen saturation (SpO2), respiratory rate (RR), serum bicarbonate level, base excess, lactate level, and incidence of the need for non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and mechanical ventilation (MV).

Methods: We recruited 30 patients with mild to moderate hypercapnic RF in the HFNO group, and data of 30 patients from historical controls, who matched the inclusion criteria, were obtained from medical records for comparison (COT group). The study was terminated after two hours, and patients were managed per the existing protocol after that. Arterial blood gas (ABG) analysis was repeated at the baseline, first, second, and third hours.

Results: In the COT group, the mean RR at the baseline, first, second, and third hours was 24.5 ± 2.61, 24.9 ± 3.03, 26.03 ± 3.4, and 22.90 ± 1.86, whereas, in the HFNO group, it was 25.93 ± 3.91, 23.00 ± 3.54, 22.50 ± 3.38, and 21.90 ± 3.57, respectively. The mean PaCO2 in the COT vs. HFNO groups was 54.45 ± 5.83 vs. 62.22 ± 9.15, 57.74 ± 6.05 vs. 58.65 ± 10.43, 60.79 ± 7.48 vs. 60.41 ± 11.24, and 55.23 ± 6.63 vs. 56.95 ± 10.31. The mean SpO2 in the COT group at these points of time was 94.50 ± 1.46, 95.4 ± 1.28, 96.10 ± 1.84, and 97.53 ± 2.05, whereas, in the HFNO group, it was 95.40 ± 2.55, 98.63 ± 1.43, 99.00 ± 1.66, and 99.50 ± 1.31, respectively. The patients who needed NIV after the study period were 50% and 36.67% in the COT and HFNO groups, respectively.

Conclusions: There was no change in PaCO2 levels with HFNO, but there was a significant improvement in SpO2 and PaO2 levels and a decreased RR. Following the termination of the study protocol, more patients in the COT group needed NIV than those in the HFNO group.

S/F and ROX indices in predicting failure of high-flow nasal cannula in children

BACKGROUND

A high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is a useful respiratory support for children with respiratory distress; however, it elevates the risk of belated intubation. Recently, indices based on percutaneous oxygen saturation, a fraction of inspired oxygen, and respiratory rate (RR) have been suggested for the prediction of HFNC failure. We aimed to evaluate various indices predicting HFNC failure in children who started receiving HFNC at a tertiary center for 27 months.

METHODS

Cases of HFNC failure were classified as hypoxic respiratory failure (HRF) or non-HRF (NHRF) depending on the cause of intubation. The ratio of percutaneous oxygen saturation to the fraction of inspired oxygen (S/F), the ratio of S/F to RR (ROX), the ratio of S/F to RR/median RR (ROX-M), and the ratio of S/F to z-score of RR (ROX-Z) were calculated and compared between groups.

RESULTS

Of the 152 cases, 45 (29.6%) failed to wean from the HFNC support, of which 21 (46.7%) were HRFs and 24 (53.3%) were NHRFs. The S/F and ROX-M at 6 h and 3 h, respectively, predicted HRF well with a high area under the curve. Initial hypercapnia and low weight were good predictors for NHRF.

CONCLUSIONS

For the management of children with HFNC, these risk factors and indicators should be monitored to make an early decision regarding intubation.

Successful noninvasive ventilation in a severely acidotic and hypercapnic comatose COVID-19 patient with multiple comorbidities: a case report

Effective use of noninvasive ventilation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is well-known. However, noninvasive ventilation in patients presenting with altered sensorium and severe acidosis (pH <7.1) has been rarely described. Invasive mechanical ventilation is associated with high mortality in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and use of noninvasive ventilation over invasive ventilation is an area of investigation. We report a case of COVID-19-induced acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in a 66-year-old male. His past medical history included obstructive sleep apnea, hypertension, cor pulmonale, atrial fibrillation, and amiodarone-induced hypothyroidism. On presentation, he had acute hypercapnic respiratory failure, severe acidosis (partial pressure of carbon dioxide [PCO₂], 147 mm Hg; pH, 7.06), and altered mentation. The patient was successfully managed with noninvasive ventilation, avoiding endotracheal intubation, invasive ventilation, and related complications. Although precarious, a trial of noninvasive ventilation can be considered in COVID-19-induced acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with hypercapnic respiratory failure, severe acidosis, and altered mentation.

Treatment of Severe Acute on Chronic Liver Failure: Management of Organ Failures, Investigational Therapeutics, and the Role of Liver Transplantation

Acute on chronic liver failure (ACLF) is a unique syndrome that afflicts patients with chronic liver disease and results in high short-term mortality, in the setting of organ system failures. Given this prognosis, there is an urgent need to understand risk factors for this condition, for appropriate medical management of organ failures, and for selection criteria for patients who may benefit from liver transplantation (LT). Although several definitions exist to identify ACLF, all of them are designed to identify patients with uniquely high mortality. Currently, management of severe ACLF relies on best supportive care for specific organ failures. Thromboelastography should guide the evaluation of coagulation pathways and hyperfibrinolysis in ACLF; prophylactic blood product transfusions and thrombopoetin agonists are not recommended. Combination therapy with terlipressin and albumin has been shown to be efficacious in the management of the hepatorenal syndrome but should be administered with caution in patients with ACLF-3. Recent data have characterized the role of beta-blockers and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt placement in the management of ACLF. Investigational therapies such as extracorporeal liver support and hepatocyte stem cell therapies have shown promise; larger scale studies may better define the subpopulations of patients with ACLF mostly likely to benefit from these evolving therapeutics. Regarding LT in ACLF, data suggest that even patients with 3 or more organ system failures may have a 1-year survival >80%. However, further efforts are needed to understand the predictors of post-LT survival to facilitate LT criteria for this condition.

Efficacy of High-Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen Therapy in Patients with Mild Hypercapnia

Objectives

To investigate the indications of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy among patients with mild hypercapnia and to explore the predictors of intubation when HFNC fails.

Methods

This retrospective study was conducted based on the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV (MIMIC-IV) database. Adult patients with mild hypercapnia (45 < PaCO₂ ≤ 60 mmHg) received either HFNC or non-invasive ventilation (NIV) oxygen therapy. Propensity score matching (PSM) was implemented to increase between-group comparability. The Kaplan–Meier method was used to estimate overall survival and cumulative intubation rates, while 28-day mortality and 48-h and 28-day intubation rates were compared using the Chi-squared test. The predictive performances of HR/SpO₂ and the ROX index (the ratio of SpO₂/FiO₂ to respiratory rate) at 4 h were assessed regarding HFNC failure, which was determined if intubation was given within 48 h after the initiation of oxygen therapy. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for HR/SpO₂ and the ROX index were calculated and compared.

Results

A total of 524,520 inpatient hospitalization records were screened, 106 patients in HFNC group and 106 patients in NIV group were successfully matched. No significant difference in 48-h intubation rate between the HFNC group (the treatment group) and the NIV group (the control group) (14.2% vs. 8.5%, p = 0.278); patients receiving HFNC had higher 28-day intubation rate (26.4% vs. 14.2%, p = 0.029), higher 28-day mortality (17.9% vs. 8.5%, p = 0.043), and longer ICU length of stay (4.4 vs. 3.3 days, p = 0.019), compared to those of NIV group. The AUC of HR/SpO₂ at 4 h after the initiation of HFNC yielded around 0.660 for predicting 48-h intubation, greater than that of the ROX index with an AUC of 0.589 (p < 0.01).

Conclusion

Patients with impending respiratory failure had lower intubation rate, shorter ICU length of stay, and lower mortality when treated mild hypercapnia with NIV over HFNC. As opposed to the ROX index, a modest, yet improved predictive performance is demonstrated using HR/SpO₂ in predicting the failure of HFNC among these patients.

Nasal High-flow Oxygen Versus Conventional Oxygen Therapy for Acute Severe Asthma Patients: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Nasal high flow (NHF) has demonstrated efficacy in relieving dyspnea in various patients with hypoxemic and hypercapnic respiratory failure. It may also reduce dyspnea in patients with acute severe asthma in the emergency department (ED). The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy of NHF with conventional oxygen therapy (COT) in improving dyspnea in acute severe asthma patients with hypoxemia in the ED.

Methods

This pilot nonblinded randomized controlled trial was conducted involving 37 patients aged ≥ 18 years with acute severe asthma and hypoxemia in the ED of Siriraj Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand (TCTR20180926003). The participants were randomly allocated to receive either COT (n = 18) or NHF (n = 19) for 120 minutes. The primary outcome was comparing the intervention effects on the patients’ degree of dyspnea measured using the modified Borg scale (MBS). The secondary outcomes were comparing the interventions based on the numeric rating scale (NRS) of dyspnea, the dyspnea scale assessing accessory muscle use, vital signs, and blood gas results.

Results

The intention‐to‐treat analysis included 37 patients (COT group n = 18 and NHF group n = 19). The baseline mean MBS was 7.8 in both groups. At 120 minutes, the mean (±SD) MBSs in patients receiving COT and NHF were 3.3 (±2.5) and 1.4 (±2.5), respectively (mean difference = 1.9 [95% CI = 0.2 to 3.8], p = 0.043). The trends in NRS and dyspnea score results were similar to those of MBS. Respiratory rates were lower with NHF (mean difference = 4.7 [95% CI = 1.5 to 7.8], p = 0.001). No between‐ or within‐group differences in blood gas results were found.

Conclusion

Nasal high flow reduced the severity of dyspnea and respiratory rate in hypoxemic patients with acute severe asthma in the ED.

Impact of High-Flow Nasal Cannula on Arterial Blood Gas Parameters in the Emergency Department

Background: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen is becoming an integral part of respiratory failure management. Effects of HFNC on arterial blood gas (ABG) parameters especially partial carbon dioxide (PaCO2) require further investigation to provide insight into the efficacy and safety of the treatment.

Methods: Acute respiratory failure patients with sequential ABG parameters before and after initiating HFNC between June 2015 and June 2017 were analyzed in a tertiary academic center. Patients' baseline characteristics were evaluated and sequential ABG changes were compared and subgrouped as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), respiratory acidosis, hypercapnia, and high lactate.

Results: A total of 120 patients were enrolled in the study. There was a significant difference between the mean partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood (PaO2), lactate, and peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) values between sequential ABGs after HFNC (P <0.001). In the COPD group (n=32), there was a significant difference between initial ABG means of PaO2, lactate, and SpO2 values and sequential ABG means (p<0.001). Hypercapnic patients PaCO2 levels were significantly lower after HFNC (p<0.001), while in the COPD group there was no significant change in PaCO2 values (p=0.068).

Conclusions: Treatment with HFNC produced improvement of blood gas parameters in subjects with acute respiratory failure in the emergency department (ED). These results suggest that HFNC can be used in hypercapnic patients as well as hypoxemic patients. Further randomized controlled studies required to establish the impact of HFNC in the ED.

High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy as an emerging option for respiratory failure: the present and the future

Conventional oxygen therapy (COT) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) have been considered for decades as frontline treatment for acute or chronic respiratory failure. However, COT can be insufficient in severe hypoxaemia whereas NIV, although highly effective, is poorly tolerated by patients and its use requires a specific expertise. High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is an emerging technique, designed to provide oxygen at high flows with an optimal degree of heat and humidification, which is well tolerated and easy to use in all clinical settings. Physiologically, HFNC reduces the anatomical dead space and improves carbon dioxide wash-out, reduces the work of breathing, and generates a positive end-expiratory pressure and a constant fraction of inspired oxygen. Clinically, HFNC effectively reduces dyspnoea and improves oxygenation in respiratory failure from a variety of aetiologies, thus avoiding escalation to more invasive supports. In recent years it has been adopted to treat de novo hypoxaemic respiratory failure, exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), postintubation hypoxaemia and used for palliative respiratory care. While the use of HFNC in acute respiratory failure is now routine as an alternative to COT and sometimes NIV, new potential applications in patients with chronic respiratory diseases (e.g. domiciliary treatment of patients with stable COPD), are currently under evaluation and will become a topic of great interest in the coming years.

High-Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen Therapy Can Be Effective for Patients in Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure with Hypercapnia: a Retrospective, Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Usually, high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy is indicated for de novo acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF). Although only a few researches have examined the effectiveness of HFNC therapy for respiratory failure with hypercapnia, this therapy is often performed under such conditions for various reasons. We investigated the effectiveness of HFNC therapy for AHRF patients with hypercapnia compared to those without hypercapnia.

METHODS

All consecutive patients receiving HFNC therapy between January 2012 and June 2018 at a university hospital were enrolled and classified into nonhypercapnic and hypercapnic groups. We compared the outcomes of both groups and adjusted the outcomes with propensity score matching.

RESULTS

A total of 862 patients were enrolled, of which 202 were included in the hypercapnic group. HFNC weaning success rates were higher, and intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital mortality was lower in the hypercapnic group than in the nonhypercapnic group (all P < 0.05). However, no statistical differences in HFNC weaning success (adjusted P = 0.623, matched P = 0.593), ICU mortality (adjusted P = 0.463, matched P = 0.195), and hospital mortality (adjusted P = 0.602, matched P = 0.579) were noted from the propensity-adjusted and propensity-matched analyses. Additionally, in the propensity score-matched subgroup analysis (according to chronic lung diseases and causes of HFNC application), there was also no significant difference in outcomes between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

In AHRF with underlying conditions, HFNC therapy might be helpful for patients with hypercapnia. Large prospective and randomized controlled trials are required for firm conclusions.