High-flow nasal cannulas versus standard oxygen therapy for moderate bronchiolitis: a quasi-experimental analysis.

BACKGROUND: In the last decades none of the medical therapies investigated have shown clear efficacy in the treatment of bronchiolitis, and literature agrees on a general de-implementation of pharmacological therapies, recognizing an effective role only to nutritional support and oxygen therapy. High-flow nasal cannulas (HFNC) has become increasingly popular in the last decade, despite its lack of clear efficacy. Recent randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing standard oxygen therapy (SOT) and HFNC did not demonstrate significant benefit of HFNC. To acquire more clinical data on HFNC efficacy we performed a retrospective, quasi-experimental analysis of patients admitted for bronchiolitis in the epidemic seasons 2021-2022 and 2022-2023. METHODS: To assess the efficacy of SOT and HFNC we used a pragmatic approach, a fuzzy regression discontinuity design, which is a quasi-experimental test. Unlike RCTs, this process is not a true randomization, but may be interpreted as quasi-randomization in an observational setting. RESULTS: HFNC did not reduce length of oxygen therapy (LOO) nor length of hospitalization (LOS) (respectively, p: 0.383 and p: 0.454). Treatment failure was not significantly different in the treatment groups (p: 0.354). CONCLUSIONS: It is crucial to perform additional RCTs with uniform protocols to determine the efficacy of HFNC more accurately in the treatment of bronchiolitis. HFNC does not reduce LOO, suggesting that early use of HFNC does not change the course of disease in moderate bronchiolitis. In view of the greater complexity and higher cost, HFNC should not be routinely used as first-line treatment in children with moderate respiratory distress and mild hypoxemia.

Changes in Oxygen Saturation During Fiberoptic Bronchoscopy: High-Flow Nasal Cannula versus Standard Oxygen Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Hypoxemia is a relatively common complication in stable patients during fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB). To prevent this complication, high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has been described as an alternative to standard oxygen therapy. However, the advantages of HFNC over standard oxygen therapy in acute care patients receiving supplemental oxygen before FOB performed with an oral approach are unknown. METHODS: We conducted an observational study that involved subjects with a presumptive diagnosis of pneumonia and a clinical indication for a bronchial aspirate sample. The type of oxygen support (standard oxygen therapy vs HFNC) was selected according to availability. The oxygen flow in the HFNC group was 60 L/min. In both groups, the FIO2 was set at 0.40. Hemodynamic, respiratory dynamics, and gas exchange data were collected at baseline, before, during, and 24 h after FOB. RESULTS: Forty subjects were included, 20 in each group (HFNC and standard oxygen therapy). The study was performed on day 5 of hospitalization in the HFNC group and on day 4 in the standard oxygen therapy group (P = .10). No significant between-group differences in baseline characteristics were observed. HFNC vs standard oxygen therapy was associated with a smaller decrease in SpO2 levels during the procedure (94% vs 90%; P = .040, respectively) and with less variation between the last SpO2 measured before FOB and the lowest SpO2 during FOB (Δ SpO2 ): 2% versus 4.5% (P = .01, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In acute subjects who required oxygen support before FOB, the use of HFNC during FOB with an oral approach was associated with a smaller decrease in SpO2 and lower Δ SpO2 compared with standard oxygen therapy.

The ROX index as a predictor of standard oxygen therapy outcomes in thoracic trauma.

BACKGROUND: Thoracic trauma is commonplace and accounts for 50-70% of the injuries found in severe trauma. Little information is available in the literature as to timing of endotracheal intubation. The main objective of this study was to assess the accuracy of the ROX index in predicting successful standard oxygen (SO) therapy outcomes, and in pre-empting intubation. METHODS: Patient selection included all thoracic trauma patients treated with standard oxygen who were admitted to a Level I trauma center between January 1, 2013 and April 30, 2020. Successful standard SO outcomes were defined as non-requirement of invasive mechanical ventilation within the 7 first days after thoracic trauma. RESULTS: One hundred seventy one patients were studied, 49 of whom required endotracheal intubation for acute respiratory distress (28.6%). A ROX index score ≤ 12.85 yielded an area under the ROC curve of 0.88 with a 95% CI [0.80-0.94], 81.63sensitivity, 95%CI [0.69-0.91] and 88.52 specificity, 95%CI [0.82-0.94] involving a Youden index of 0.70. Patients with a median ROX index greater than 12.85 within the initial 24 h were less likely to require mechanical ventilation within the initial 7 days of thoracic trauma. CONCLUSION: We have shown that a ROX index greater than 12.85 at 24 h was linked to successful standard oxygen therapy outcomes in critical thoracic trauma patients. It is our belief that an early low ROX index in the initial phase of trauma should heighten vigilance on the part of the attending intensivist, who has a duty to optimize management.

Implications of early respiratory support strategies on disease progression in critical COVID-19: a matched subanalysis of the prospective RISC-19-ICU cohort.

BACKGROUND: Uncertainty about the optimal respiratory support strategies in critically ill COVID-19 patients is widespread. While the risks and benefits of noninvasive techniques versus early invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) are intensely debated, actual evidence is lacking. We sought to assess the risks and benefits of different respiratory support strategies, employed in intensive care units during the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic on intubation and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality rates. METHODS: Subanalysis of a prospective, multinational registry of critically ill COVID-19 patients. Patients were subclassified into standard oxygen therapy ≥10 L/min (SOT), high-flow oxygen therapy (HFNC), noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NIV), and early IMV, according to the respiratory support strategy employed at the day of admission to ICU. Propensity score matching was performed to ensure comparability between groups. RESULTS: Initially, 1421 patients were assessed for possible study inclusion. Of these, 351 patients (85 SOT, 87 HFNC, 87 NIV, and 92 IMV) remained eligible for full analysis after propensity score matching. 55% of patients initially receiving noninvasive respiratory support required IMV. The intubation rate was lower in patients initially ventilated with HFNC and NIV compared to those who received SOT (SOT: 64%, HFNC: 52%, NIV: 49%, p = 0.025). Compared to the other respiratory support strategies, NIV was associated with a higher overall ICU mortality (SOT: 18%, HFNC: 20%, NIV: 37%, IMV: 25%, p = 0.016). CONCLUSION: In this cohort of critically ill patients with COVID-19, a trial of HFNC appeared to be the most balanced initial respiratory support strategy, given the reduced intubation rate and comparable ICU mortality rate. Nonetheless, considering the uncertainty and stress associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, SOT and early IMV represented safe initial respiratory support strategies. The presented findings, in agreement with classic ARDS literature, suggest that NIV should be avoided whenever possible due to the elevated ICU mortality risk.

High-Flow Nasal Cannula Versus Standard Oxygen Therapy After Extubation in Liver Transplantation: A Matched Controlled Study.

BACKGROUND: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is a key component of oxygen therapy and has largely been used in patients with acute respiratory failure. We conducted a matched controlled study with the aim to compare the preventive use of oxygen therapy delivered by HFNC versus via air-entrainment mask (standard O2) after extubation in adult subjects with liver transplantation for reducing postextubation hypoxemia. METHODS: Twenty-nine subjects with liver transplantation who received HFNC after extubation (HFNC group) were matched 1:1 with 29 controls (standard O2 group) chosen from an historical group of 90 subjects admitted to the ICU during the previous 36 months. The primary outcome of the study was the incidence of hypoxemia at 1 h and 24 h after extubation. Secondary outcomes were the rate of weaning failure, ICU length of stay, and 28-d mortality. RESULTS: The incidence of hypoxemia was not significantly different between the HFNC and standard O2 groups at 1 h and 24 h after extubation. In the HFNC group, there was a trend toward a lower rate of weaning failure compared with the standard O2 group. ICU length of stay and 28-d mortality were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Early application of HFNC in the subjects with liver transplantation did not reduce the incidence of hypoxemia after extubation compared with standard O2 and did not modify the incidence of weaning failure, ICU length of stay, and 28-d mortality in this high-risk population of subjects. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT03441854.).

Efficacy of High-Flow Nasal Cannula vs Standard Oxygen Therapy or Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure in Children with Respiratory Distress: A Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy in providing respiratory support of children with acute lower respiratory infection (ALRI), hypoxemia, and respiratory distress. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that compared HFNC and standard flow oxygen therapy or nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) and reported treatment failure as an outcome. Data were synthesized using Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: Compared with standard oxygen therapy, HFNC significantly reduced treatment failure (risk ratio [RR] 0.49, 95% CI 0.40-0.60, P < .001) in children with mild hypoxemia (arterial pulse oximetry [SpO2] >90% on room air). HFNC had an increased risk of treatment failure compared with nCPAP in infants age 1-6 months with severe hypoxemia (SpO2 <90% on room air or SpO2 >90% on supplemental oxygen) (RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.17-2.67, P = .007). No significant differences were found in intubation rates and mortality between HFNC and standard oxygen therapy or nCPAP. HFNC had a lower risk of nasal trauma compared with nCPAP (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.16-0.77, P = .009). CONCLUSIONS: Among children <5 years of age with ALRI, respiratory distress, and mild hypoxemia, HFNC reduced the risk of treatment failure when compared with standard oxygen therapy. However, nCPAP was associated with a lower risk of treatment failure than HFNC in infants age 1-6 months with ALRI, moderate-to-severe respiratory distress, and severe hypoxemia. No differences were found in intubation and mortality between HFNC and standard oxygen therapy or nCPAP.

2018 Year in Review: Noninvasive Respiratory Support.

Noninvasive respiratory support refers to strategies aimed at providing oxygenation and/or ventilation without the use of an artificial airway. These strategies include the use of standard oxygen delivery devices (face masks, low-flow nasal cannulas), noninvasive ventilation, and high-flow nasal cannula. Considerable interest has been generated recently as to which therapy provides the optimum noninvasive support. This review examined the important literature related to noninvasive respiratory support published in 2018.

Respiratory support for infants with bronchiolitis, a narrative review of the literature.

Bronchiolitis is a common viral disease that significantly affects infants less than 12 months of age. The purpose of this review is to present a review of the current knowledge of the uses of respiratory support in the management of infants with bronchiolitis presenting to hospital. We electronically searched MEDLINE, Cochrane, CINAHL and EMBASE (inception to 25th March 2018), to manually search for clinical trials that address the management strategies for respiratory support of infants with bronchiolitis. We identified 120 papers who met the inclusion criteria, of which 33 papers were relevant for this review with only nine randomized controlled trials. This review demonstrated that non-invasive respiratory support reduced the need for escalation of therapy, particularly the proportion of intubations required for infants with bronchiolitis. Additionally, clear economic benefits have been demonstrated when non-invasive ventilation has been used. The potential early use of non-invasive respiratory supports such as nasal high flow therapy and non-invasive ventilation may have an impact on health care costs and reduction in ICU admissions and intubation rates. High-grade evidence demonstrates safety and quality of high flow therapy in general ward settings.