ABSTRACT
Objective: This study aimed to describe and compare the epidemiological, demographic, clinical, laboratory and radiological characteristics as well as the complications, treatments, and outcomes of these patients. Methods: We retrospectively investigated clinical data of patients with C. psittaci infection (psittacosis) in eight Grade IIIA hospitals of Fujian. Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) was used identify C. psittaci in clinical samples of all included patients. Results: A total of 74 patients (39 severe/35 non-severe) was diagnosed with psittacosis, 25 (33.8%) of whom had history of poultry exposure. Common symptoms included high fever (98% [37/74]), fatigue (52.7% [39/74]), and dyspnea (51.4% [38/74]). Common manifestations in imaging included consolidation (89.2%), pleural effusion (77.0%), and air bronchogram (66.2%). Common complications included acute respiratory distress syndrome (55.4% [41/74]), type I respiratory failure (52.7% [39/74]), acute liver injury (41.9% [31/74]), and secondary infection (27.0% [20/74]). The in-hospital mortality rate was 8.11% (6/74). Conclusion: C. psittaci infection is represents an underestimated cause of CAP. For SCAP patients with poultry and bird contact history, specimens were encouraged to be sended for mNGS test in time. C. psittaci infection can lead to severe, multiple system involvement, and several complications. mNGS facilitate timely diagnosis of C. psittaci infection.
ABSTRACT
Background: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) can be used in stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients, but the effect of HFNC on clinical outcomes in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) is still uncertain. Methods: We searched electronic literature databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing HFNC with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in hypercapnic patients with AECOPD. The primary endpoint of this meta-analysis was PaCO2, PaO2, and SpO2. The secondary outcomes were the respiratory rate, mortality, complications, and intubation rate. Results: We included 7 RCTs with a total of 481 patients. There were no significant differences on measures of PaCO2 (MD = -0.42, 95%CI -3.60 to 2.75, Z = 0.26, and P = 0.79), PaO2 (MD = -1.36, 95%CI -4.69 to 1.97, Z = 0.80, and P = 0.42), and SpO2 (MD = -0.78, 95%CI -1.67 to 0.11, Z = 1.72, P = 0.08) between the HFNC group and the NIV group. There was no significant difference in measures of the mortality and intubation rate between the HFNC group (OR = 0.72, 95%CI 0.30 to 1.69, Z = 0.76, and P = 0.44) and the NIV group (OR = 2.38, 95%CI 0.49 to 11.50, Z = 1.08, and P = 0.28), respectively. But the respiratory rate in the HFNC group was lower than that in the NIV group (MD = -1.13, 95%CI -2.13 to -0.14, Z = 2.23, and P = 0.03), and fewer complications were found in the HFNC group (OR = 0.26, 95%CI 0.14 to 0.47, Z = 4.46, and P < 0.00001). Conclusion: NIV was noninferior to HFNC in decreasing PaCO2 and increasing PaO2 and SpO2. Similarly, the mortality and intubation rate was similar among the two groups. The respiratory rate and complications were inferior in the AECOPD group treated with HFNC.
Subject(s)
Noninvasive Ventilation , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , Respiratory Insufficiency , Humans , Oxygen , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/drug therapy , Oxygen Inhalation TherapyABSTRACT
Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is an essential method for Acute exacerbation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) recovery. We perform a meta-analysis to compare early PR with usual care. A literature search was performed through these databases: PubMed, MEDLINE database, Google Scholar, Cochrane, Embase from inception to July 2021. Eligible trials were clinical randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of early PR and usual care in AECOPD patients. The primary endpoint of this meta-analysis was FEV1% predicted, 6-min walk test (6MWD), modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) and George Respiratory Questionnaire-total (SGRQ-total). The secondary outcomes were borg dyspnea score, short-form 36 health survey questionnaire physical (SF-36 physical) and SF-36 mental. We included 13 RCTs with a total of 866 patients. There were no significant effects of the PR group on measures of FEV1% predicted (MD = 0.50, 95%CI -1.43 to 2.44, Z = 0.51, p = 0.61), borg dyspnea score (MD = -0.88, 95%CI -1.89 to 0.13, Z = 1.71, p = 0.09) and SF-36 mental (MD = 4.34, 95%CI -1.64 to 10.32, Z = 1.42, p = 0.16) compared with usual care. PR group achieved better 6MWD (MD = 97.58, 95%CI 17.21 to 177.96, Z = 2.38, p = 0.02), mMRC (MD = -0.36, 95%CI -0.52 to -0.21, Z = 4.56, p Ë 0.00001), SGRQ-total (MD= -9.67, 95%CI -16.23 to -3.11, Z = 2.89, p = 0.004) and SF-36 physical (MD = 4.98, 95%CI 0.60 to 9.35, Z = 2.23, p = 0.03) compared with usual care group. Early PR in AECOPD patients would lead to better 6MWD, mMRC, SGRQ-total and SF-36 physical. But there were no significant effects of the PR group on measures of FEV1% predicted, borg dyspnea score and SF-36 mental.
Subject(s)
Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , Dyspnea/etiology , Humans , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/rehabilitation , Quality of Life , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Walk TestABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Low-concentration oxygen is an established way for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with Type II respiratory failure. Hypercapnia can complicate both COPD exacerbations and stable COPD. Treating with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) can reduce carbon dioxide tension in arterial (PaCO2 ) in hypercapnic COPD. As an open system, high-flow nasal cannula oxygen (HFNC) is easy to tolerate and use. More researches are needed to focus on how HFNC is used to treat COPD patients with hypercapnic respiratory failure. METHODS: The Cochrane Library, Medline, EMBASE, and CINAHL database were retrieved from inception to October 2019. Eligible trials were clinical randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of HFNC and conventional oxygen on hypercapnic COPD patients. Two researchers assessed the quality of each study and extracted the data into RevMan 5.3 independently. The primary outcome was PaCO2 and the secondary outcome was PaO2 . RESULTS: Four RCTs with 329 patients were included. The research results indicated that PaCO2 in the HFNC group was similar to the conventional oxygen group. No significant difference were observed in PaCO2 (MD -0.98, CI: -2.67 to 0.71, Z = 1.14, p = 0.25) and PaO2 (MD -0.72, CI: -6.99 to 5.55, Z = 0.23, p = 0.82) between the HFNC group and conventional oxygen group. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis showed no difference in PO2 and PCO2 between the HFNC and conventional oxygen. But we should treat this conclusion with caution because the number of studies and participants is small and, there is heterogeneity in the PaO2 and PCO2 measurements between stable and AECOPD.
