Association of weaning failure from mechanical ventilation with transthoracic echocardiography parameters: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Weaning from mechanical ventilation is a challenging step during recovery from critical illness. Weaning failure or early reintubation are associated with increased morbidity and mortality, exposing patients to life-threatening complications. Cardiac dysfunction represents the most common cause of weaning failure. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the association between transthoracic echocardiographic parameters and weaning failure. METHODS: We performed a systematic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE screening for prospective studies providing echocardiographic data collected just before the beginning of spontaneous breathing trial and outcome of the weaning attempt. We primarily focused on parameters currently recommended for evaluation of left ventricular (LV) systolic or diastolic dysfunction. RESULTS: We included 11 studies in our primary analysis, which included data on LV ejection fraction (LVEF, n=10 studies) and parameters recommended for the assessment of LV diastolic function (E/e' ratio n=10; E/A ratio n=9; E wave n=8; and e' wave n=7). Weaning failure was significantly associated to a higher E/e' ratio (standardised mean difference [SMD]=1.70, 95% confidence interval [CI; 0.78-2.62]; P<0.001), lower e' wave (SMD=-1.22, 95% CI [-2.33 to -0.11]; P=0.03), and higher E wave (SMD=0.97, 95% CI [0.29-1.65]; P=0.005). We found no association between weaning failure and LVEF (SMD=-0.86, 95% CI [-1.92-0.20]; P=0.11) and E/A ratio (SMD=0.00, 95% CI [-0.30-0.31]; P=0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Weaning failure is associated with parameters indicating worse LV diastolic function (E/e', e' wave, E wave) and increased LV filling pressure (E/e' ratio). The association between weaning failure and LV systolic dysfunction as evaluated by LVEF is more unclear. More studies are needed to clarify this aspect and regarding the role of right ventricular function.

High flow nasal therapy in immunocompromised patients with acute respiratory failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The role of high-flow nasal therapy (HFNT) as compared to conventional oxygen therapy (COT) in immunocompromised patients admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) with acute respiratory failure (ARF) remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis in order to address this issue. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Medline and Embase until November 7th, 2018. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomized prospective and retrospective evidence were selected. Observational studies were considered for sensitivity analysis. Primary outcome was mortality rate; intubation rate was a secondary outcome. RESULTS: We included four studies in the primary analysis: one RCT, two RCT's post-hoc analyses and one retrospective study. We found no significant difference in short-term mortality comparing HFNT vs. COT: 1) ICU: n = 872 patients, odds ratio (OR) = 0.80 [0.44,1.45], p = 0.46, I2 = 30%, p = 0.24; 2) 28-day: n = 996 patients, OR = 0.79 [0.45,1.38], p = 0.40, I2 = 52%, p = 0.12). Conversely, we found a reduction of intubation rate in the HFNT group (n = 1052 patients, OR = 0.74 [0.55,0.98], p = 0.03, I2 = 7%, p = 0.36). The inclusion of one observational study for sensitivity analysis did not grossly change results. CONCLUSIONS: We found no benefit of HFNT over COT on mortality in immunocompromised patients with ARF. However, HFNT was associated with a lower intubation rate warranting further research.