ABSTRACT
Objective:To explore whether the adoption of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) as an initial oxygen therapy in emergency department (ED) could reduce the intubation rate and improve the clinical outcomes of patients with dyspnea and hypoxemia compared with conventional oxygen therapy (COT).Methods:A perspective single-center randomized controlled trial was conducted in the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University from October 1, 2019 to September 30, 2020. A total of 210 eligible patients with acute dyspnea and hypoxemia in ED were recruited and randomized (in 1:1) to receive HFNC or COT for 1 h immediately after the grouping. The primary outcome was the rate of intubation within 24 h. The secondary outcomes included total intubation rate, escalation of breathing support method, patients’ disposition, length of ICU stay and hospital mortality. Continuous outcomes were analyzed by independent samples t test or Mann-Whitney U test according to the data distribution. Discontinuous outcomes were compared with the Chi-square test. Kaplan-Meier curve analysis was performed for 60-day survival. Results:Finally, 105 patients were recruited in each group. HFNC reduced the intubation rate within the first 24 h (4.8% vs. 14.3%, P = 0.019) and the rate of patients escalated to upgrade oxygen therapy (34.3% vs. 53.3%, P = 0.005), but did not affect the total intubation rate during the whole attendance ( P = 0.509). In ED, HFNC helped more patients to achieve the targeted saturation of pulse oxygen (90.5% vs. 78.1%, P = 0.02), and reduced respiratory rate (RR) to < 25 breaths per min (68.6% vs. 49.0%, P = 0.004), but did not affect the length of hospital stay, hospital mortality and 60-day survival rate ( P > 0.05). Conclusions:Initial application of HFNC in ED could reduce the intubation rate within 24 h, decrease the rate of escalation of oxygen therapy, improve oxygenation and relieve dyspnea.
ABSTRACT
Objective To explore the effect of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) with helmet or facial mask on clinical efficacy, tolerability, and prognosis in patients with acute respiratory failure. Methods Fifty patients with acute respiratory failure according to the inclusion criteria were recruited from January 2018 to July 2018 in Emergency Intensive Care Unit of the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University. Included patients were randomly allocated into the helmet group or facial mask group. Based on conventional drug therapy, pressure support mode was performed with the interface of the helmet or facial mask. Oxygenation index, arterial carbon dioxide partial pressure, and respiratory rates were measured before and after the treatment, and the data were compared and analyzed by the repeated measures ANOVA. Tolerance score, complication rate, tracheal intubation rate, and mortality rate were recorded at each observation time point of the two groups. Results The oxygenation index before NIV, at 4 h and at the end of NIV treatment of the helmet group were significantly increased from (160.29±50.32) mmHg to (249.29±83.47) mmHg and (259.24±87.09) mmHg; the oxygenation index of the facial mask group were increased from (168.63±38.63) mmHg to (225.00±74.96) mmHg and (217.69±77.80) mmHg, and there was no significant difference within the two groups (P <0.05). The respiratory rates before NIV, at 4 h and at the end of NIV treatment of the helmet group were obviously decreased from (27.60±7.64) breaths/min to (17.92±4.55) breaths/min and (16.88±3.90) breaths/min; the respiratory rates of the facial mask group were decreased from (24.68±6.14) breaths/min to (20.36±4.25) breaths/min and (19.68±3.34) breaths/min, and the differences within the two groups were statistically significant (P <0.05). However, there were no significant differences on oxygenation index and respiratory rates between the helmet group and facial mask group (P >0.05). Patients in the helmet was better tolerated than those in the facial mask group [ratio of good tolerance 96％ (24/25) vs 56％ (14/25) (P = 0.001) and fully tolerance 80％ (20/25) vs 36％ (9/25) (P =0.002)] and had less complications (1/25 vs 10/25, P = 0.002). 84％ patients in the helmet group and 76％ patients in the facial mask group were successfully weaned and discharged after NIV treatment (P =0.480). Conclusions Similar clinical efficacy in improving blood gas exchange and relieving dyspnea were observed in the helmet group and the facial mask group in patients with acute respiratory failure. However, the helmet is better tolerant, and had lower complication rate, which is especially suitable for patients with chest trauma combined with facial injuries.