The effectiveness of transnasal high flow nasal cannula in bronchoscopy under sedation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical application effects of transnasal high flow nasal cannula compared to other conventional modalities for oxygen therapy devices in patients undergoing bronchoscopy. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in multiple English databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, to collect relevant studies on the application of high flow nasal cannula in patients undergoing bronchoscopy, and conducted a meta-analysis utilizing RevMan 5.4 software, following the predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Results: A total of 12 studies meeting the inclusion criteria were included, involving 1,631 patients (HFNC group: n = 811, other oxygen therapy group: n = 820). The meta-analysis results demonstrated that HFNC significantly reduced the incidence of hypoxemia and improved the minimum oxygen saturation compared to conventional oxygen therapy (RR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.18-0.41, p < 0.00001; MD = 6.09, 95% CI: 3.73-8.45, p < 0.00001). Furthermore, HFNC showed statistically significant differences when compared to non-invasive ventilation in terms of hypoxemia incidence (RR = 3.52, 95% CI: 1.13-10.97, p = 0.03) and minimum oxygen saturation (MD = -1.97, 95% CI: -2.97--0.98, p < 0.0001). In addition, HFNC resulted in significantly shorter surgical time and higher PaO2 at the end of the procedure compared to conventional oxygen therapy (MD = 1.53, 95% CI: 0.66-2.40, p = 0.0006; MD = 15.52, 95% CI: 10.12-20.92, p < 0.00001). However, there were no statistically significant differences observed in PaCO2, EtCO2, and MAP at the end of the procedure (MD = 1.23, 95% CI: -0.74-3.20, p = 0.22; MD = -0.35, 95% CI: -3.77-3.06, p = 0.84; MD = -0.54, 95% CI: -2.44-1.36, p = 0.58). Conclusion: When HFNC or NIV is utilized during the examination and treatment of bronchoscopy patients, both oxygenation modalities enhance oxygenation function and reduce the incidence of hypoxemia compared to conventional oxygen therapy. HFNC can be regarded as a viable alternative to NIV for specific high-risk patients undergoing bronchoscopy. It decreases the duration of bronchoscopy and improves the PaO2 levels at the end of the procedure, but does not significantly impact the PaCO2, EtCO2, and mean arterial pressure. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier 1414374462@qq.com.

Effect of supraglottic jet oxygenation and ventilation on hypoxemia in patients undergoing endoscopic surgery with sedation: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Nasal cannulas and face masks are common oxygenation tools used in conventional oxygen therapy for patients undergoing endoscopic surgery with sedation. However, as a novel supraglottic ventilation technique, the application of supraglottic jet oxygenation and ventilation (SJOV) in endoscopic surgery has not been well established. METHOD: We searched six electronic databases from inception to January 16, 2024, to assess the oxygenation/ventilation efficacy and side effects of the of SJOV in endoscopic surgery. The primary outcome was the incidence of hypoxemia. The secondary outcomes were the incidence of respiratory depression and adverse effects (nasal bleeding, sore throat, and dry mouth). RESULTS: Nine trials involving 2017 patients were included. The results demonstrated that the incidence of hypoxemia was lower in the SJOV group compared with the conventional oxygen therapy (COT) group [9 trails; 2017 patients; risk ratio (RR) = 0.18; 95% confidence interval (CI), (0.11-0.28)]. Subgroup analyses showed that SJOV reduced the incidence of hypoxemia in the high-risk group but had no effect on the low-risk group. The incidence of respiratory depression is lower in SJOV than in COT, but has increased side effects such as dry mouth. There was no statistically significant difference in nose bleeding or sore throat between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Compared with the COT, the SJOV decreased the incidence of hypoxemia in high-risk patients during endoscopic surgery with sedation. There was an increased risk of dry mouth, but not of nose bleeding or sore throat, during endoscopic surgery under sedation.

[High-flow nasal oxygen versus conventional oxygen therapy during cesarean section under neuraxial anesthesia in pregnant women with heart disease: a randomized controlled trial].

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the beneficial effects of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy during cesarean section in pregnant women with heart disease. METHODS: We conducted a single-center, single-blinded randomized trial of HFNC oxygen therapy in pregnant women with heart disease undergoing cesarean section under neuraxial anesthesia.The participants were randomly assigned to receive either HFNC oxygen therapy with inspiratory flow of 30 L/min with 40% FIO2(n=27) or conventional oxygen therapy (COT) with oxygen flow rate of 5 L/min via a nasal cannula (n=31).The primary outcome was maternal desaturation (SpO2 < 94% lasting more than 3 min or PaO2/FIO2≤300 mmHg). RESULTS: Maternal desaturation was observed in 7.4%(2/27) of the women in HFNC group and in 32.3%(10/31) in the COT group.None of the cases required tracheal intubation during the perioperative period.The HFNC group had a significantly higher incidence of postoperative leukocytosis (P < 0.05) but without pyrexia or other inflammation-related symptoms.There were no significant differences between the two groups in the secondary maternal outcomes (need for respiratory support, maternal ICU admission, postoperative respiratory complications, and cardiovascular complications) or neonatal outcomes (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: In pregnant women with heart disease, HFNC therapy can significantly reduce the rate of maternal desaturation during the perioperative period of cesarean section without adverse effects on short-term maternal or fetal outcomes.

Effects of non-invasive respiratory support in post-operative patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Re-intubation secondary to post-extubation respiratory failure in post-operative patients is associated with increased patient morbidity and mortality. Non-invasive respiratory support (NRS) alternative to conventional oxygen therapy (COT), i.e., high-flow nasal oxygen, continuous positive airway pressure, and non-invasive ventilation (NIV), has been proposed to prevent or treat post-extubation respiratory failure. Aim of the present study is assessing the effects of NRS application, compared to COT, on the re-intubation rate (primary outcome), and time to re-intubation, incidence of nosocomial pneumonia, patient discomfort, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay, and mortality (secondary outcomes) in adult patients extubated after surgery. METHODS: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized controlled trials. A search from Medline, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science from inception until February 2, 2024 was performed. RESULTS: Thirty-three studies (11,292 patients) were included. Among all NRS modalities, only NIV reduced the re-intubation rate, compared to COT (odds ratio 0.49, 95% confidence interval 0.28; 0.87, p = 0.015, I2 = 60.5%, low certainty of evidence). In particular, this effect was observed in patients receiving NIV for treatment, while not for prevention, of post-extubation respiratory failure, and in patients at high, while not low, risk of post-extubation respiratory failure. NIV reduced the rate of nosocomial pneumonia, ICU length of stay, and ICU, hospital, and long-term mortality, while not worsening patient discomfort. CONCLUSIONS: In post-operative patients receiving NRS after extubation, NIV reduced the rate of re-intubation, compared to COT, when used for treatment of post-extubation respiratory failure and in patients at high risk of post-extubation respiratory failure.

Use of high-flow nasal cannula versus other noninvasive ventilation techniques or conventional oxygen therapy for respiratory support following pediatric cardiac surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Noninvasive respiratory support may be provided to decrease the risk of postextubation failure following surgery. Despite these efforts, approximately 3%-27% of infants and children still experience respiratory failure after tracheal extubation following cardiac surgery. This systematic review evaluates studies comparing the efficacy of high-flow nasal cannula to conventional oxygen therapy such as nasal cannula and other noninvasive ventilation techniques in preventing postextubation failure in this patient population. METHODS: A systematic and comprehensive search was conducted in major databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Central. The search encompassed articles focusing on the prophylactic use of high-flow nasal cannula following tracheal extubation in pediatric patients undergoing cardiac surgery for congenital heart disease. The inclusion criteria for this review consisted of randomized clinical trials as well as observational, cohort, and case-control studies. RESULTS: A total of 1295 studies were screened and 12 studies met the inclusion criteria. These 12 studies included a total of 1565 children, classified into three groups: seven studies compared high-flow nasal cannula to noninvasive ventilation techniques, four studies compared high-flow nasal cannula to conventional oxygen therapy, and one observational single-arm study explored the use of high-flow nasal cannula with no control group. There was no significant difference in the incidence of tracheal reintubation between high-flow nasal cannula and conventional oxygen therapy (risk ratio [RR] = 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.24-1.90, p = .46). However, there was a lower incidence of tracheal reintubation in patients who were extubated to high-flow nasal cannula versus those extubated to noninvasive ventilation techniques (RR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.32-0.63, p < .01). The high-flow nasal cannula group also demonstrated a lower mortality rate compared to the noninvasive ventilation techniques group (RR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.16-0.61, p < .01) as well as a shorter postoperative length of stay (mean difference = -8.76 days, 95% CI: -13.08 to -4.45, p < .01) and shorter intensive care length of stay (mean difference = -4.63 days, 95% CI: -9.16 to -0.11, p = .04). CONCLUSION: High-flow nasal cannula is more effective in reducing the rate of postextubation failure compared to other forms of noninvasive ventilation techniques following surgery for congenital heart disease in pediatric-aged patients. high-flow nasal cannula is also associated with lower mortality rates and shorter length of stay. However, when comparing high-flow nasal cannula to conventional oxygen therapy, the findings were inconclusive primarily due to a limited number of scientific studies available on this specific comparison. Future study is needed to further define the benefit of high-flow nasal cannula compared to conventional oxygen therapy and various types of noninvasive ventilation techniques.

Comparison between high-flow nasal cannula and conventional oxygen therapy in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and conventional oxygen therapy (COT) are important respiratory support strategies for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. However, the results are conflicting for the risk of intubation with HFNC as compared to COT. OBJECTIVES: We systematically synthesized the outcomes of HFNC relative to COT in COVID-19 patients with AHRF and evaluated these outcomes in relevant subpopulations. DESIGN: This study was designed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. DATA SOURCES AND METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, medRxiv, BioRxiv, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized controlled trials and observational studies that compared the efficacy of HFNC with COT in patients with COVID-19-related AHRF. Primary outcomes were intubation rate and mortality rate. Secondary outcomes were the ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2), respiratory rate, hospital length of stay, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, and days free from invasive mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: In total, 20 studies with 5732 patients were included. We found a decreased risk of requiring intubation in HFNC compared to COT [odds ratio (OR) = 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.46-0.82, p = 0.0009, I2 = 75%]. Similarly, we found HFNC was associated with lower risk of intubation rate compared to COT in the subgroup of patients with baseline PaO2/FiO2 < 200 mmHg (OR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.55-0.86, p = 0.0007, I2 = 45%), and who were in ICU settings at enrollment (OR = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.38-0.85, p = 0.005, I2 = 80%). HFNC was associated with an improvement of PaO2/FiO2 and respiratory rate compared to COT. The use of HFNC compared to COT did not reduce the mortality rate, days free from invasive mechanical ventilation, hospital length of stay, or ICU length of stay. CONCLUSION: Compared to COT, HFNC may decrease the need for tracheal intubation in patients with COVID-19-related AHRF, particularly among patients with baseline PaO2/FiO2 < 200 mmHg and those in ICU settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (no. CRD42022339072).

High-flow nasal cannula oxygen versus conventional oxygen therapy for acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNC) in patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19 remains uncertain. We aimed at assessing whether HFNC is associated with reduced risk of intubation or mortality in patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19 compared with conventional oxygen therapy (COT). METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing HFNC vs. COT in patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19, published in English from inception to December 2022. Pediatric studies, studies that compared HFNC with a noninvasive respiratory support other than COT and those in which intubation or mortality were not reported were excluded. Two authors independently screened and selected articles for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. Fixed-effects or random-effects meta-analysis were performed according to statistical heterogeneity. Primary outcomes were risk of intubation and mortality across RCTs. Effect estimates were calculated as risk ratios and 95% confidence interval (RR; 95% CI). Observational studies were used for sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Twenty studies were analyzed, accounting for 8383 patients, including 6 RCTs (2509 patients) and 14 observational studies (5874 patients). By pooling the 6 RCTs, HFNC compared with COT significantly reduced the risk of intubation (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.98; p = 0.02) and reduced length of stay in hospital. HFNC did not significantly reduce the risk of mortality (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.11; p = 0.40). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19, HFNC reduced the need for intubation and shortened length of stay in hospital without significant decreased risk of mortality. Trial registration The study was registered on the International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) at https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ with the trial registration number CRD42022340035 (06/20/2022).

Efficacy of high-flow nasal cannula in patients with acute heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Acute heart failure (AHF) is often associated with diffuse insufficiency and arterial hypoxemia, requiring respiratory support for rapid and effective correction. We aimed to compare the effects of high-flow nasal cannula(HFNC) with those of conventional oxygen therapy(COT) or non-invasive ventilation(NIV) on the prognosis of patients with AHF. METHODS: We performed the search using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP databases from the inception to August 31, 2023 for relevant studies in English and Chinese. We included controlled studies comparing HFNC with COT or NIV in patients with AHF. Primary outcomes included the intubation rate, respiratory rate (RR), heart rate (HR), and oxygenation status. RESULTS: From the 1288 original papers identified, 16 studies met the inclusion criteria, and 1333 patients were included. Compared with COT, HFNC reduced the intubation rate (odds ratio [OR]: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.14-0.58, P = 0.0005), RR (standardized mean difference [SMD]: -0.73 95% CI: -0.99 - -0.47, P < 0.00001) and HR (SMD: -0.88, 95% CI: -1.07 - -0.69, P < 0.00001), and hospital stay (SMD: -0.94, 95% CI: -1.76 - -0.12, P = 0.03), and increase arterial oxygen partial pressure (PaO2), (SMD: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.70-1.06, P < 0.00001) and oxygen saturation (SpO2 [%], SMD: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.34-1.06, P = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences in intubation rate, RR, HR, arterial blood gas parameters, and dyspnea scores between the HFNC and NIV groups. Compared with COT, HFNC effectively reduced the intubation rate and provided greater clinical benefits to patients with AHF. However, there was no significant difference in the clinical prognosis of patients with AHF between the HFNC and NIV groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (identifier: CRD42022365611).

Cost Analysis of High-Flow Oxygen Therapy Compared with Conventional Oxygen Therapy in Severe COVID-19 in Colombia: Data from a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Background: A randomized clinical trial (HiFlo-COVID-19 Trial) showed that among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with high-flow oxygen therapy (HFOT) significantly reduced the need for invasive mechanical ventilation support and time for clinical recovery compared with conventional oxygen therapy (COT). However, the cost of this strategy is unknown. Objective: We examined total cost of HFOT treatment compared with COT in real-world setting. Methods: We conducted a post-trial-based cost analysis from the perspective of a managed competition healthcare system, using actual records of billed costs. Cost categories include general ward, intensive care unit, procedures, imaging, laboratories, medications, supplies, and others. Results: A total of 188 participants (mean age 60, 33% female) were included. Average costs (and standard deviation) in the HFOT group were USD $7992 (7394) and in the COT group USD $ 10,190 (9402). Differences, however, did not reach statistical significance (P=0.093). However, resource use was always less costly for the HNFO group, with an overall percentage decrease of 27%. Two categories make up 72% of all savings: medications (41%) and intensive care unit (31%). Conclusion: For patients in ICU with severe COVID-19 the cost of treatment with HFOT as compared to COT is likely to be cost-saving due to less use of medications and length of stay in ICU.

Effects of High-Flow Nasal Cannula on Right Heart Dysfunction in Patients with Acute-on-Chronic Respiratory Failure and Pulmonary Hypertension.

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has several benefits in patients affected by different forms of acute respiratory failure, based on its own mechanisms. We postulated that HFNC may have some advantages over conventional oxygen therapy (COT) on the heart function in patients with acute-on-chronic respiratory failure with concomitant pulmonary hypertension (PH). We therefore designed this retrospective observational study to assess if HFNC improves the right and left ventricle functions and morphologies, arterial blood gases (ABGs), and patients' dyspnea, compared to COT. We enrolled 17 hospitalized patients receiving HFNC, matched with 17 patients receiving COT. Echocardiographic evaluation was performed at the time of admission (baseline) and 10 days after (T10). HFNC showed significant improvements in right ventricular morphology and function, and a reduction in sPAP. However, there were no significant changes in the left heart measurements with HFNC application. Conversely, COT did not lead to any modifications in echocardiographic measurements. In both groups, oxygenation significantly improved from baseline to T10 (in the HFNC group, from 155 ± 47 to 204 ± 61 mmHg while in the COT group, from 157 ± 27 to 207 ± 27 mmHg; p < 0.0001 for both comparisons). In conclusion, these data suggest an improvement of oxygenation with both treatments; however, only HFNC was able to improve the right ventricular morphology and function after 10 days from the beginning of treatment in a small cohort of patients with acute-on-chronic respiratory failure with PH.

Effect of post-extubation high-flow nasal cannula combined with respiratory training versus conventional oxygen therapy on postoperative pulmonary complications in patients after major abdominal surgery: protocol for a single-centre randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Nearly 234 million patients undergo surgery each year, and 1.3 million among them develop complications. Patients undergoing major upper abdominal surgery (operation time > 2 h) have a really high incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs). The occurrence of PPCs seriously affects the outcomes of patients. High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is as effective as noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in preventing postoperative hypoxaemia and respiratory failure. Respiratory training using positive expiratory pressure (PEP) Acapella (Choice) has been shown to help patients with rapid recovery from postoperative atelectasis. However, no relevant randomized controlled studies have been conducted to clarify the effect of HFNC combined with respiratory training in the prevention of PPCs. This study aims to investigate whether the use of HFNC combined with respiratory training could reduce the incidence of PPCs within 7 days after major upper abdominal surgery compared to that with conventional oxygen therapy (COT). METHODS: This is a randomized controlled single-centre trial. A total of 328 patients who undergo major abdominal surgery will be included. Subjects who fulfil the eligible criteria will be randomly assigned into the combination treatment group (Group A) or COT group (Group B) after extubation. The interventions will begin within 30 min of extubation. Patients in Group A will receive HFNC for at least 48 h and respiratory training three times a day for at least 72 h. Patients in Group B will receive oxygen therapy through a nasal catheter or mask for at least 48 h. Our primary endpoint is the incidence of PPCs within 7 days, and the secondary outcome measures include 28-day mortality, reintubation rate, length of hospital stay, and all-cause mortality within 1 year. DISCUSSION: This trial would help provide evidence on the effectivity of applying HFNC combined with respiratory training for the prevention of PPCs in patients undergoing major upper abdominal surgery. The objective of this study is to determine the optimal treatment approach to improve the prognosis of patients undergoing surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ChiCTR2100047146. Registered on 8 June 2021. Retrospectively registered.

Comparison of High-Flow Nasal Cannula with Conventional Oxygen Therapy in Patients with Hypercapnic Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) compared with conventional oxygen therapy (COT) in patients with hypercapnic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), including arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2), arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), respiratory rate (RR), treatment failure, exacerbation rates, adverse events and comfort evaluation. Patients and Methods: PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were retrieved from inception to September 30, 2022. Eligible trials were randomized controlled trials and crossover studies comparing HFNC and COT in hypercapnic COPD patients. Continuous variables were reported as mean and standard derivation and calculated by weighted mean differences (MD), while dichotomous variables were shown as frequency and proportion and calculated by odds ratio (OR), with the 95% confidence intervals (Cl). Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software. Results: Eight studies were included, five with acute hypercapnia and three with chronic hypercapnia. In acute hypercapnic COPD, short-term HFNC reduced PaCO2 (MD -1.55, 95% CI: -2.85 to -0.25, I² = 0%, p <0.05) and treatment failure (OR 0.54, 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.88, I² = 0%, p<0.05), but there were no significant differences in PaO2 (MD -0.36, 95% CI: -2.23 to 1.52, I² = 45%, p=0.71) and RR (MD -1.07, 95% CI: -2.44 to 0.29, I² = 72%, p=0.12). In chronic hypercapnic COPD, HFNC may reduce COPD exacerbation rates, but there was no advantage in improving PaCO2 (MD -1.21, 95% CI: -3.81 to 1.39, I² = 0%, p=0.36) and PaO2 (MD 2.81, 95% CI: -1.39 to 7.02, I² = 0%, p=0.19). Conclusion: Compared with COT, short-term HFNC reduced PaCO2 and the need for escalating respiratory support in acute hypercapnic COPD, whereas long-term HFNC reduced COPD exacerbations rates in chronic hypercapnia. HFNC has great potential for treating hypercapnic COPD.

Comparison of High-Flow Nasal Cannula Versus Conventional Oxygen Therapy After Extubation in Children Undergoing Cardiac Surgery: A Meta-analysis.

This meta-analysis aims to compare high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and conventional oxygen therapy (COT) post-extubation in pediatric cardiac surgical patients. The present meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Two authors independently searched three electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify relevant articles published in English from inception to February 2023. Searching was conducted using keywords and medical subject headings (MeSH), which included "conventional oxygen therapy," "high-flow nasal cannula," "extubation," "pediatrics," and "cardiac surgery." Our primary outcome was extubation failure defined as the need for reintubation within 24 to 72 hours after planned extubation. Secondary outcomes assessed in this meta-analysis included partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO2), partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide (PaCO2), and the ratio of PaO2 and FiO2 (fraction of inspired oxygen). A total of three studies were included in the meta-analysis, with a total of 227 patients.  No significant difference was found between the two groups (the HFNC group and the COT group) in terms of reintubation (RR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.34, 2.30, p-value: 0.80). Pooled meta-analysis showed that PaO2 was significantly greater in patients receiving HFNC at six hours (MD: 33.73, 95% CI: 18.33, 49.14, p-value<0.001), at 12 hours (MD: 44.90, 95% CI: 28.59, 61.22, p-value<0.001) and at 24 hours (MD: 43.53, 95% CI: 29.16, 57.91, p-value<0.001) of extubation. PaCO2 was significantly lower in patients receiving HFNC at six hours (MD: -5.40, 95% CI: -7.94, -2.85, p-value<0.001) and at 12 hours (MD: -5.93, 95% CI: -9.78, -2.09, p-value<0.001) of extubation. However, no significant difference was reported between the two groups after 24 hours of extubation (MD: -0.84, 95% CI: -9.04, 7.37, p-value: 0.84) and PaO2/FiO2 was significantly greater in patients receiving HFNC at six hours (MD: 64.14, 95% CI: 36.10, 92.17, p-value<0.001), at 12 hours (MD: 70.73, 95% CI: 20.46, 121.01, p-value<0.001) and at 24 hours (MD: 82.18, 95% CI: 50.03, 114.32, p-value<0.001) of intubation. In conclusion, the meta-analysis revealed that compared with COT, HFNC significantly increased PaO2 and the ratio of PaO2 to FiO2, and decreased PaCO2. No significant differences were observed in the rate of reintubation between the two groups. This is the first meta-analysis comparing HFNC and COT in pediatric cardiac surgical patients.

The use of high-flow nasal cannula in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease under exacerbation and stable phases: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has been increasingly utilized in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); however, the effects on reducing the need for intubation or reintubation remain unclear. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to investigate whether HFNC therapy was superior to conventional oxygen therapy (COT) or noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in patients with COPD. METHODS: A literature search was performed in electronic databases until October 1st, 2022. The primary outcome was the need for intubation/reintubation. All analyses were performed using R (version 4.0.3) and STATA SE (version 15.1). RESULTS: When HFNC therapy was compared with NIV in patients with COPD under initial respiratory support and postextubation, no significant differences were found in the risk of intubation (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.98) and reintubation (RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.50). Compared to NIV, HFNC therapy did not decrease the partial pressure of carbon dioxide or increase the partial pressure of oxygen to the fraction of inspired oxygen. However, HFNC therapy was associated with a lower incidence of skin breakdown (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.69) and a higher comfort score (SMD 0.90, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.20) than NIV. When HFNC therapy was compared with COT during initial respiratory treatment for COPD exacerbation, a lower risk of treatment failure was found (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.89). When HFNC therapy was compared with long-term oxygen therapy, quality of life (measured by SGRQ-C) was significantly improved (SMD -0.42, 95% CI -0.69 to -0.14). CONCLUSION: HFNC therapy might be used as an alternative to NIV for COPD exacerbation with mild-moderate hypercapnia under close monitoring and is a potential domiciliary treatment for stable COPD.

Comparison of high-flow nasal cannula and conventional oxygen therapy for high-risk patients during bronchoscopy examination: protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has been proven to improve oxygenation and avoid intubation in hypoxemic patients. It has also been utilized during endoscopy examination to reduce the incidence of hypoxia. However, little is known about the effects of HFNC versus conventional oxygen therapy (COT) on oxygenation during bronchoscopy examination via nasal route; particularly, no study has compared the use of HFNC with that of COT at similar FIO2 for patients who have high-risk factors of desaturation during bronchoscopy examination. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This randomized controlled trial will be implemented in four academic centers in China. Patients who have high-risk factors including hypoxemia, hypercapnia, morbid obesity, and narrow airway will be enrolled to use HFNC or COT during bronchoscopy examination. In the HFNC group, the initial gas flow will be set at 50 L/min with a fraction of inspired oxygen (FIO2) at 0.45, if the patient tolerates, the flow can be increased to 60L/min at most, while in the COT group, oxygen flow will be set at 6 L/min via a conventional nasal cannula. After 5 min pre-oxygenation, the bronchoscope will be inserted via the nasal route. Vital signs, oxygenation (SpO2), and transcutaneous CO2 (PtCO2) will be continuously monitored. The primary outcome is the incidence of hypoxemia, defined as SpO2 < 90% for 10 s during bronchoscopy examination, and secondary outcomes include the need for treatment escalation and adverse events. DISCUSSION: Hypoxia is a common complication of bronchoscopy, our study attempted to demonstrate that HFNC may reduce the probability of hypoxia during bronchoscopy in high-risk patients. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and national and international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.chictr.org.cn/ : ChiCTR2100055038. Registered on 31 December 2021.

A Review of High Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen Therapy in Human and Veterinary Medicine.

Respiratory distress is a common ailment in small animal medicine. Oxygen supplementation is a mainstay of initial therapy. High Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen Therapy (HFNCOT) has become increasingly popular as a treatment modality in human medicine, and more recently in canine patients. These devices deliver high flow rates of heated and humidified oxygen at an adjustable fraction of inspired oxygen . This article reviews current literature in human patients on HFNCOT as well as studies that have evaluated its use in veterinary patients. A discussion of the respiratory physiology that is associated with respiratory distress, in addition to an overview of currently available oxygen supplementation modalities is provided. The physiologic benefits of HFNCOT are explained, as are technical aspects associated with its use. Recommendations on initial settings, maintenance therapy, and weaning are also described.

Initial application of high-flow nasal cannula for patients with acute dyspnea and hypoxemia in emergency department: A randomized controlled trial / 中华急诊医学杂志

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.

Modified high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy versus conventional oxygen therapy in patients undergoing bronchoscopy: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Hypoxemia frequently occurs during bronchoscopy. High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy may be a feasible alternative to prevent the deterioration of gas exchange during bronchoscopy. With the convenience of clinical use in mind, we modified an HFNC using a single cannula. This clinical trial was designed to test the hypothesis that a modified HFNC would decrease the proportion of patients with a single moment of peripheral arterial oxygen saturation (SpO2) < 90% during bronchoscopy. METHODS: In this single-center, prospective randomized controlled trial, hospitalized patients in the respiratory department in need of diagnostic bronchoscopy were randomly assigned to a modified HFNC oxygen therapy group or a conventional oxygen therapy (COT) group. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a single moment of SpO2 < 90% during bronchoscopy. RESULTS: Eight hundred and twelve patients were randomized to the modified HFNC (n = 406) or COT (n = 406) group. Twenty-four patients were unable to cooperate or comply with bronchoscopy. Thus, 788 patients were included in the analysis. The proportion of patients with a single moment of SpO2 < 90% during bronchoscopy in the modified HFNC group was significantly lower than that in the COT group (12.5% vs. 28.8%, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the fraction of inspired oxygen between the two groups. The lowest SpO2 during bronchoscopy and 5 min after bronchoscopy in the modified HFNC group was significantly higher than that in the COT group. Multivariate analysis showed that a baseline forced vital capacity (FVC) < 2.7 L (OR, 0.276; 95% CI, 0.083-0.919, p = 0.036) and a volume of fluid instilled > 60 ml (OR, 1.034; 95% CI, 1.002-1.067, p = 0.036) were independent risk factors for hypoxemia during bronchoscopy in the modified HFNC group. CONCLUSIONS: A modified HFNC could decrease the proportion of patients with a single moment of SpO2 < 90% during bronchoscopy. A lower baseline FVC and large-volume bronchoalveolar lavage may predict desaturation during bronchoscopy when using a modified HFNC. Trial registration ClinicalTrials. Gov: NCT02606188. Registered 17 November 2015.

A prospective study on use of thrive (transnasal humidified rapid insufflation ventilatory exchange) versus conventional nasal oxygenation following extubation of adult cardiac surgical patients.

Background: Postoperative pulmonary complications in cardiac surgery increase mortality and morbidity. High flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNC) is one of the preventive measures to reduce the incidence of lung complications. HFNC can decrease dyspnea and improve physiologic parameters after extubation, including respiratory rate and heart rate, compared with conventional oxygen therapy. In this study, we evaluated the role of THRIVE (Transnasal Humidified Rapid Insufflation Ventilatory Exchange) after extubation. Methodology: We prospectively randomized 60 adults aged between 18 and 65 years undergoing elective cardiac surgery to either High flow oxygen therapy using THRIVE (Group A) or conventional nasal cannula (group B). Arterial paO2, paCO2, pH at three points of time i.e., 1, 2, 4 hrs after extubation were evaluated using arterial blood gas analysis. Ventilation duration, the incidence of reintubation, sedation score, mortality, and other complications were also assessed. Results: Thirty adults in each group had comparable patient characteristics. There was a statistically significant decline in paCO2 in group A at 1, 2, 4 hrs post extubation (P = 0.022, 0.02, <0.001) with a significant increase in oxygenation (P < 0.001) when compared to group B.ICU stay duration was similar between two groups. No complications were noted in both groups. Conclusion: THRIVE is safe to use following extubation in adult cardiac surgical patients.

Post-extubation oxygenation strategies in acute respiratory failure: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: High-flow nasal cannula oxygenation (HFNC) and noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NPPV) possibly decrease tracheal reintubation rates better than conventional oxygen therapy (COT); however, few large-scale studies have compared HFNC and NPPV. We conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the effectiveness of three post-extubation respiratory support devices (HFNC, NPPV, and COT) in reducing the mortality and reintubation risk. METHODS: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Ichushi databases were searched. COT, NPPV, and HFNC use were assessed in patients who were aged ≥ 16 years, underwent invasive mechanical ventilation for > 12 h for acute respiratory failure, and were scheduled for extubation after spontaneous breathing trials. The GRADE Working Group Approach was performed using a frequentist-based approach with multivariate random-effect meta-analysis. Short-term mortality and reintubation and post-extubation respiratory failure rates were compared. RESULTS: After evaluating 4631 records, 15 studies and 2600 patients were included. The main cause of acute hypoxic respiratory failure was pneumonia. Although NPPV/HFNC use did not significantly lower the mortality risk (relative risk [95% confidence interval] 0.75 [0.53-1.06] and 0.92 [0.67-1.27]; low and moderate certainty, respectively), HFNC use significantly lowered the reintubation risk (0.54 [0.32-0.89]; high certainty) compared to COT use. The associations of mortality with NPPV and HFNC use with respect to either outcome did not differ significantly (short-term mortality and reintubation, relative risk [95% confidence interval] 0.81 [0.61-1.08] and 1.02 [0.53-1.97]; moderate and very low certainty, respectively). CONCLUSION: NPPV or HFNC use may not reduce the risk of short-term mortality; however, they may reduce the risk of endotracheal reintubation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER AND DATE OF REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42020139112, 01/21/2020).