Effects of high-flow nasal oxygen cannula versus other noninvasive ventilation in extubated patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Expert Rev Respir Med
; 16(1): 109-119, 2022 01.
Article
en En
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-34348551
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES:
A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to compare the effects of high-flow nasal oxygen cannula (HFNC) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in extubated patients with respiratory insufficiency.METHODS:
The Cochrane Library, PubMed, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to 28 February 2021, to identify randomized controlled trials. The primary outcome was reintubation within 24-72 hours after a planned extubation. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.RESULTS:
Six articles with1746 patients were included. The effect of HFNC on the reintubation rate was noninferior to that of NIV (OR = 1.11, 95% CI 0.85-1.44). The rate of treatment failure was 20.40% with HFNC versus 20.92% with NIV; this difference was nonsignificant (OR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.72-1.32, P = 0.85). HFNC reduced the rates of skin lesion occurrence (10.28% versus 23.82%, OR = 0.37, 95% CI 0.26-0.53, P < 0.00001) and post-extubation respiratory failure (23.76% versus 25.56%, OR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.46-0.88, P = 0.006), compared with NIV.CONCLUSIONS:
In extubated patients, HFNC was noninferior to NIV in the rate of reintubation and treatment failure. Compared with NIV, HFNC decreased the occurrence of skin lesions and post-extubation respiratory failure.Palabras clave
Texto completo:
1
Colección:
01-internacional
Banco de datos:
MEDLINE
Asunto principal:
Insuficiencia Respiratoria
/
Ventilación no Invasiva
Tipo de estudio:
Clinical_trials
/
Diagnostic_studies
/
Prognostic_studies
/
Systematic_reviews
Límite:
Humans
Idioma:
En
Revista:
Expert Rev Respir Med
Año:
2022
Tipo del documento:
Article