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.

Comparative Effect of High-Frequency Nasal Cannula and Noninvasive Ventilation on the Work of Breathing and Postoperative Pulmonary Complication after Pediatric Congenital Cardiac Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Various forms of commonly used noninvasive respiratory support strategies have considerable effect on diaphragmatic contractile function which can be evaluated using sonographic diaphragm activity parameters. OBJECTIVE: To compare the magnitude of respiratory workload decreased as assessed by thickening fraction of the diaphragm and longitudinal diaphragmatic strain while using high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) modes [nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) and bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP)] in pediatric patients after cardiothoracic surgery. METHODOLOGY: This prospective randomized controlled trial was performed at a tertiary care surgical intensive care unit in postcardiac surgery patients aged between 1 and 48 months, who were randomly allocated into three groups: 1) HFNC (with flows at 2 L/kg/min), 2) NIPPV via RAMS cannula in PSV mode (pressure support 8 cmH2O, PEEP 5 cmH2O), and 3) BiPAP in nCPAP mode (CPAP of 5 cmH2O). Measurements were recorded at baseline after extubation (R0) and subsequently every 12 hourly (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5) at 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 hours respectively until therapy was discontinued. RESULTS: Sixty patients were included, with 20 patients each in the NIPPV group, HFNC group, and BiPAP group. Longitudinal strain at crura of diaphragm was lower in the BiPAP group as compared to HFNC group at R2-R4 [R2 (-4.27± -2.73 vs - 8.40± -6.40, P = 0.031), R3 (-5.32± -2.28 vs -8.44± -5.6, P = 0.015), and R4 (-3.8± -3.42 vs -12.4± -7.12, P = 0.040)]. PFR was higher in HFNC than NIPPV group at baseline and R1-R3[R0 (323 ± 114 vs 264 ± 80, P = 0.008), R1 (311 ± 114 vs 233 ± 66, P = 0.022), R2 (328 ± 116 vs 237 ± 4, P = 0.002), R3 (346 ± 112 vs 238 ± 54, P = 0.001)]. DTF and clinical parameters of increased work of breathing remain comparable between three groups. The rate of reintubation (within 48 hours of extubation or at ICU discharge) was 0.06% (1 in NIPPV, 1 in BiPAP, 2 in HFNC) and remain comparable between groups (P = 1.0). CONCLUSION: BiPAP may provide better decrease in work of breathing compared to HFNC as reflected by lower crural diaphragmatic strain pattern. HFNC may provide better oxygenation compared to NIPPV group, as reflected by higher PFR ratio. Failure rate and safety profile are similar among different methods used.

Respiratory Support Practices for Bronchiolitis in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit.

Importance: Admissions to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) due to bronchiolitis are increasing. Whether this increase is associated with changes in noninvasive respiratory support practices is unknown. Objective: To assess whether the number of PICU admissions for bronchiolitis between 2013 and 2022 was associated with changes in the use of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC), noninvasive ventilation (NIV), and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and to identify factors associated with HFNC and NIV success and failure. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study examined encounter data from the Virtual Pediatric Systems database on annual PICU admissions for bronchiolitis and ventilation practices among patients aged younger than 2 years admitted to 27 PICUs between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2022. Use of HFNC and NIV was defined as successful if patients were weaned to less invasive support (room air or low-flow nasal cannula for HFNC; room air, low-flow nasal cannula, or HFNC for NIV). Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was the number of PICU admissions for bronchiolitis requiring the use of HFNC, NIV, or IMV. Linear regression was used to analyze the association between admission year and absolute numbers of encounters stratified by the maximum level of respiratory support required. Multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze factors associated with HFNC and NIV success and failure (defined as not meeting the criteria for success). Results: Included in the analysis were 33 816 encounters for patients with bronchiolitis (20 186 males [59.7%]; 1910 patients [5.6%] aged ≤28 days and 31 906 patients [94.4%] aged 29 days to <2 years) treated at 27 PICUs from 2013 to 2022. A total of 7615 of 15 518 patients (49.1%) had respiratory syncytial virus infection and 1522 of 33 816 (4.5%) had preexisting cardiac disease. Admissions to the PICU increased by 350 (95% CI, 170-531) encounters annually. When data were grouped by the maximum level of respiratory support required, HFNC use increased by 242 (95% CI, 139-345) encounters per year and NIV use increased by 126 (95% CI, 64-189) encounters per year. The use of IMV did not significantly change (10 [95% CI, -11 to 31] encounters per year). In all, 22 381 patients (81.8%) were successfully weaned from HFNC to low-flow oxygen therapy or room air, 431 (1.6%) were restarted on HFNC, 3057 (11.2%) were escalated to NIV, and 1476 (5.4%) were escalated to IMV or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Successful use of HFNC increased from 820 of 1027 encounters (79.8%) in 2013 to 3693 of 4399 encounters (84.0%) in 2022 (P = .002). In all, 8476 patients (81.5%) were successfully weaned from NIV, 787 (7.6%) were restarted on NIV, and 1135 (10.9%) were escalated to IMV or ECMO. Success with NIV increased from 224 of 306 encounters (73.2%) in 2013 to 1335 of 1589 encounters (84.0%) in 2022 (P < .001). In multivariable logistic regression, lower weight, higher Pediatric Risk of Mortality III score, cardiac disease, and PICU admission from outside the emergency department were associated with greater odds of HFNC and NIV failure. Conclusions and Relevance: Findings of this cross-sectional study of patients aged younger than 2 years admitted for bronchiolitis suggest there was a 3-fold increase in PICU admissions between 2013 and 2022 associated with a 4.8-fold increase in HFNC use and a 5.8-fold increase in NIV use. Further research is needed to standardize approaches to HFNC and NIV support in bronchiolitis to reduce resource strain.

Non-invasive high-frequency ventilation in newborn infants with respiratory distress.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory distress occurs in up to 7% of newborns, with respiratory support (RS) provided invasively via an endotracheal (ET) tube or non-invasively via a nasal interface. Invasive ventilation increases the risk of lung injury and chronic lung disease (CLD). Using non-invasive strategies, with or without minimally invasive surfactant, may reduce the need for mechanical ventilation and the risk of lung damage in newborn infants with respiratory distress. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of nasal high-frequency ventilation (nHFV) compared to invasive ventilation via an ET tube or other non-invasive ventilation methods on morbidity and mortality in preterm and term infants with or at risk of respiratory distress. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and three trial registries in April 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster- or quasi-RCTs of nHFV in newborn infants with respiratory distress compared to invasive or non-invasive ventilation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected the trials for inclusion, extracted data, assessed the risk of bias, and undertook GRADE assessment. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 33 studies, mostly in low- to middle-income settings, that investigated this therapy in 5068 preterm and 46 term infants. nHFV compared to invasive respiratory therapy for initial RS We are very uncertain whether nHFV reduces mortality before hospital discharge (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.20 to 2.18; 1 study, 80 infants) or the incidence of CLD (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.59; 2 studies, 180 infants), both very low-certainty. ET intubation, death or CLD, severe intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH) and neurodevelopmental disability (ND) were not reported. nHFV vs nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) used for initial RS We are very uncertain whether nHFV reduces mortality before hospital discharge (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.41; 4 studies, 531 infants; very low-certainty). nHFV may reduce ET intubation (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.82; 5 studies, 571 infants), but there may be little or no difference in CLD (RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.80 to 2.27; 4 studies, 481 infants); death or CLD (RR 2.50, 95% CI 0.52 to 12.01; 1 study, 68 participants); or severe IVH (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.78; 4 studies, 531 infants), all low-certainty evidence. ND was not reported. nHFV vs nasal intermittent positive-pressure ventilation (nIPPV) used for initial RS nHFV may result in little to no difference in mortality before hospital discharge (RR 1.86, 95% CI 0.90 to 3.83; 2 studies, 84 infants; low-certainty). nHFV may have little or no effect in reducing ET intubation (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.76 to 2.34; 5 studies, 228 infants; low-certainty). There may be a reduction in CLD (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.95; 5 studies, 307 infants; low-certainty). A single study (36 infants) reported no events for severe IVH. Death or CLD and ND were not reported. nHFV vs high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) used for initial RS We are very uncertain whether nHFV reduces ET intubation (RR 2.94, 95% CI 0.65 to 13.27; 1 study, 37 infants) or reduces CLD (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.46 to 2.98; 1 study, 37 participants), both very low-certainty. There were no mortality events before hospital discharge or severe IVH. Other deaths, CLD and ND, were not reported. nHFV vs nCPAP used for RS following planned extubation nHFV probably results in little or no difference in mortality before hospital discharge (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.64; 6 studies, 1472 infants; moderate-certainty). nHFV may result in a reduction in ET reintubation (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.51; 11 studies, 1897 infants) and CLD (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.91; 10 studies, 1829 infants), both low-certainty. nHFV probably has little or no effect on death or CLD (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.06; 2 studies, 966 infants) and severe IVH (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.13; 3 studies, 1117 infants), both moderate-certainty. We are very uncertain whether nHFV reduces ND (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.37 to 2.29; 1 study, 74 infants; very low-certainty). nHFV versus nIPPV used for RS following planned extubation nHFV may have little or no effect on mortality before hospital discharge (RR 1.83, 95% CI 0.70 to 4.79; 2 studies, 984 infants; low-certainty). There is probably a reduction in ET reintubation (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.89; 6 studies, 1364 infants), but little or no effect on CLD (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.04; 4 studies, 1236 infants); death or CLD (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.08; 3 studies, 1070 infants); or severe IVH (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.10; 4 studies, 1162 infants), all moderate-certainty. One study reported there might be no difference in ND (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.16; 1 study, 72 infants; low-certainty). nHFV versus nIPPV following initial non-invasive RS failure nHFV may have little or no effect on mortality before hospital discharge (RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.10 to 21.33); or ET intubation (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.51 to 2.98); or CLD (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.47); or severe IVH (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.02 to 10.87); 1 study, 39 participants, all low- or very low-certainty. Other deaths or CLD and ND were not reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: For initial RS, we are very uncertain if using nHFV compared to invasive respiratory therapy affects clinical outcomes. However, nHFV may reduce intubation when compared to nCPAP. For planned extubation, nHFV may reduce the risk of reintubation compared to nCPAP and nIPPV. nHFV may reduce the risk of CLD when compared to nCPAP. Following initial non-invasive respiratory support failure, nHFV when compared to nIPPV may result in little to no difference in intubation. Large trials, particularly in high-income settings, are needed to determine the role of nHFV in initial RS and following the failure of other non-invasive respiratory support. Also, the optimal settings of nHVF require further investigation.

Trophic Nutrition in ICU Patients Undergoing High-Flow Oxygen Therapy and/or Noninvasive Mechanical Ventilation: The Nutri-Trophic Study.

Enteral nutrition (EN) therapy in ICU patients requiring oxygen therapy with high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and/or noninvasive mechanical ventilation (NIMV) is controversial. A prospective, cohort, observational, and multicenter study was conducted in 10 ICUs in Spain to analyze the 90-day mortality, tolerance, side effects, and infectious complications of trophic EN in patients requiring HFNC therapy and/or NIVM. A total of 149 patients were enrolled. The mean age, severity scores, tracheobronchitis, bacteremia, and antimicrobial therapy were significantly higher in deceased than in living patients (p < 0.05), and the mortality rate was 14.8%. A total of 110 patients received oral trophic feedings, 36 patients received nasogastric tube feedings (NGFs), and 3 received mixed feedings. Trophic EN was discontinued in only ten (14.9%) patients because of feeding-related complications. The variables selected for the multivariate logistic regression on feeding discontinuation were SOFA upon admission (OR per unit = 1.461) and urea (OR per mg/dL = 1.029). There were no significant differences in the development of new infections according to the route of EN administration. Early trophic feeding administered to patients with acute respiratory failure requiring noninvasive ventilation is safe and feasible, and is associated with few dietary and infectious complications in a mortality, setting comparable to similar studies.

High-Flow Nasal Cannula Versus Noninvasive Ventilation as Initial Treatment in Acute Hypoxia: A Propensity Score-Matched Study.

IMPORTANCE: Patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with hypoxemia often have mixed or uncertain causes of respiratory failure. The optimal treatment for such patients is unclear. Both high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) are used. OBJECTIVES: We sought to compare the effectiveness of initial treatment with HFNC versus NIV for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure treated with HFNC or NIV within 24 hours of arrival to the University of Michigan adult ED from January 2018 to December 2022. We matched patients 1:1 using a propensity score for odds of receiving NIV. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was major adverse pulmonary events (28-d mortality, ventilator-free days, noninvasive respiratory support hours) calculated using a win ratio. RESULTS: A total of 1154 patients were included. Seven hundred twenty-six (62.9%) received HFNC and 428 (37.1%) received NIV. We propensity score matched 668 of 1154 (57.9%) patients. Patients on NIV versus HFNC had lower 28-day mortality (16.5% vs. 23.4%, p = 0.033) and required noninvasive treatment for fewer hours (median 7.5 vs. 13.5, p < 0.001), but had no difference in ventilator-free days (median [interquartile range]: 28 [26, 28] vs. 28 [10.5, 28], p = 0.199). Win ratio for composite major adverse pulmonary events favored NIV (1.38; 95% CI, 1.15-1.65; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this observational study of patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, initial treatment with NIV compared with HFNC was associated with lower mortality and fewer composite major pulmonary adverse events calculated using a win ratio. These findings underscore the need for randomized controlled trials to further understand the impact of noninvasive respiratory support strategies.

Comparison between high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) alternated with non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and HFNO and NIV alone in patients with COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Non-invasive respiratory support (conventional oxygen therapy [COT], non-invasive ventilation [NIV], high-flow nasal oxygen [HFNO], and NIV alternated with HFNO [NIV + HFNO] may reduce the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in patients with COVID-19. The outcome of patients treated non-invasively depends on clinical severity at admission. We assessed the need for IMV according to NIV, HFNO, and NIV + HFNO in patients with COVID-19 according to disease severity and evaluated in-hospital survival rates and hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) lengths of stay. METHODS: This cohort study was conducted using data collected between March 2020 and July 2021. Patients ≥ 18 years admitted to the ICU with a diagnosis of COVID-19 were included. Patients hospitalized for < 3 days, receiving therapy (COT, NIV, HFNO, or NIV + HFNO) for < 48 h, pregnant, and with no primary outcome data were excluded. The COT group was used as reference for multivariate Cox regression model adjustment. RESULTS: Of 1371 patients screened, 958 were eligible: 692 (72.2%) on COT, 92 (9.6%) on NIV, 31 (3.2%) on HFNO, and 143 (14.9%) on NIV + HFNO. The results for the patients in each group were as follows: median age (interquartile range): NIV (64 [49-79] years), HFNO (62 [55-70] years), NIV + HFNO (62 [48-72] years) (p = 0.615); heart failure: NIV (54.5%), HFNO (36.3%), NIV + HFNO (9%) (p = 0.003); diabetes mellitus: HFNO (17.6%), NIV + HFNO (44.7%) (p = 0.048). > 50% lung damage on chest computed tomography (CT): NIV (13.3%), HFNO (15%), NIV + HFNO (71.6%) (p = 0.038); SpO2/FiO2: NIV (271 [118-365] mmHg), HFNO (317 [254-420] mmHg), NIV + HFNO (229 [102-317] mmHg) (p = 0.001); rate of IMV: NIV (26.1%, p = 0.002), HFNO (22.6%, p = 0.023), NIV + HFNO (46.8%); survival rate: HFNO (83.9%), NIV + HFNO (63.6%) (p = 0.027); ICU length of stay: NIV (8.5 [5-14] days), NIV + HFNO (15 [10-25] days (p < 0.001); hospital length of stay: NIV (13 [10-21] days), NIV + HFNO (20 [15-30] days) (p < 0.001). After adjusting for comorbidities, chest CT score and SpO2/FiO2, the risk of IMV in patients on NIV + HFNO remained high (hazard ratio, 1.88; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-3.04). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with COVID-19, NIV alternating with HFNO was associated with a higher rate of IMV independent of the presence of comorbidities, chest CT score and SpO2/FiO2. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05579080.

Severe Community-Acquired Pneumonia: Noninvasive Mechanical Ventilation, Intubation, and HFNT.

Severe acute respiratory failure (ARF) is a major issue in patients with severe community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Standard oxygen therapy is the first-line therapy for ARF in the less severe cases. However, respiratory supports may be delivered in more severe clinical condition. In cases with life-threatening ARF, invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) will be required. Noninvasive strategies such as high-flow nasal therapy (HFNT) or noninvasive ventilation (NIV) by either face mask or helmet might cover the gap between standard oxygen and IMV. The objective of all the supporting measures for ARF is to gain time for the antimicrobial treatment to cure the pneumonia. There is uncertainty regarding which patients with severe CAP are most likely to benefit from each noninvasive support strategy. HFNT may be the first-line approach in the majority of patients. While NIV may be relatively contraindicated in patients with excessive secretions, facial hair/structure resulting in air leaks or poor compliance, NIV may be preferable in those with increased work of breathing, respiratory muscle fatigue, and congestive heart failure, in which the positive pressure of NIV may positively impact hemodynamics. A trial of NIV might be considered for select patients with hypoxemic ARF if there are no contraindications, with close monitoring by an experienced clinical team who can intubate patients promptly if they deteriorate. In such cases, individual clinician judgement is key to choose NIV, interface, and settings. Due to the paucity of studies addressing IMV in this population, the protective mechanical ventilation strategies recommended by guidelines for acute respiratory distress syndrome can be reasonably applied in patients with severe CAP.

The Diaphragmatic Initiated Ventilatory Assist (DIVA) trial: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial comparing rates of extubation failure in extremely premature infants undergoing extubation to non-invasive neurally adjusted ventilatory assist versus non-synchronized nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation.

BACKGROUND: Invasive mechanical ventilation contributes to bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), the most common complication of prematurity and the leading respiratory cause of childhood morbidity. Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) may limit invasive ventilation exposure and can be either synchronized or non-synchronized (NS). Pooled data suggest synchronized forms may be superior. Non-invasive neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NIV-NAVA) delivers NIV synchronized to the neural signal for breathing, which is detected with a specialized catheter. The DIVA (Diaphragmatic Initiated Ventilatory Assist) trial aims to determine in infants born 240/7-276/7 weeks' gestation undergoing extubation whether NIV-NAVA compared to non-synchronized nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NS-NIPPV) reduces the incidence of extubation failure within 5 days of extubation. METHODS: This is a prospective, unblinded, pragmatic, multicenter phase III randomized clinical trial. Inclusion criteria are preterm infants 24-276/7 weeks gestational age who were intubated within the first 7 days of life for at least 12 h and are undergoing extubation in the first 28 postnatal days. All sites will enter an initial run-in phase, where all infants are allocated to NIV-NAVA, and an independent technical committee assesses site performance. Subsequently, all enrolled infants are randomized to NIV-NAVA or NS-NIPPV at extubation. The primary outcome is extubation failure within 5 days of extubation, defined as any of the following: (1) rise in FiO2 at least 20% from pre-extubation for > 2 h, (2) pH ≤ 7.20 or pCO2 ≥ 70 mmHg; (3) > 1 apnea requiring positive pressure ventilation (PPV) or ≥ 6 apneas requiring stimulation within 6 h; (4) emergent intubation for cardiovascular instability or surgery. Our sample size of 478 provides 90% power to detect a 15% absolute reduction in the primary outcome. Enrolled infants will be followed for safety and secondary outcomes through 36 weeks' postmenstrual age, discharge, death, or transfer. DISCUSSION: The DIVA trial is the first large multicenter trial designed to assess the impact of NIV-NAVA on relevant clinical outcomes for preterm infants. The DIVA trial design incorporates input from clinical NAVA experts and includes innovative features, such as a run-in phase, to ensure consistent technical performance across sites. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov , trial identifier NCT05446272 , registered July 6, 2022.

High-flow nasal oxygen versus conventional oxygen therapy and noninvasive ventilation in COVID-19 respiratory failure: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive methods of respiratory support, including noninvasive ventilation (NIV), continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), and high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO), are potential strategies to prevent progression to requirement for invasive mechanical ventilation in acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure. The COVID-19 pandemic provided an opportunity to understand the utility of noninvasive respiratory support among a homogeneous cohort of patients with contemporary management of acute respiratory distress syndrome. We performed a network meta-analysis of studies evaluating the efficacy of NIV (including CPAP) and HFNO, compared with conventional oxygen therapy (COT), in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library were searched in May 2023. Standard random-effects meta-analysis was used first to estimate all direct pairwise associations and the results from all studies were combined using frequentist network meta-analysis. Primary outcome was treatment failure, defined as discontinuation of HFNO, NIV, or COT despite progressive disease. Secondary outcome was mortality. RESULTS: We included data from eight RCTs with 2302 patients, (756 [33%] assigned to COT, 371 [16%] to NIV, and 1175 [51%] to HFNO). The odds of treatment failure were similar for NIV (P=0.33) and HFNO (P=0.25), and both were similar to that for COT (reference category). The odds of mortality were similar for all three treatments (odds ratio for NIV vs COT: 1.06 [0.46-2.44] and HFNO vs COT: 0.97 [0.57-1.65]). CONCLUSIONS: Noninvasive ventilation, high-flow nasal oxygen, and conventional oxygen therapy are comparable with regards to treatment failure and mortality in COVID-19-associated acute respiratory failure. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42023426495.

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.

In acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, noninvasive oxygenation methods may reduce death vs. standard oxygen therapy.

SOURCE CITATION: Pitre T, Zeraatkar D, Kachkovski GV, et al. Noninvasive oxygenation strategies in adult patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Chest. 2023;164:913-928. 37085046.

Oxygen debt as a predictor of high-flow nasal cannula therapy failure in SARS-CoV-2 patients with acute respiratory failure: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is known for its rapid progression to acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF). The increased use of oxygen therapy during the pandemic and the progression of AHRF have highlighted the need to promptly determine the need for orotracheal intubation (OTI). OBJETIVE: To determine the validity of quantitative measurement of oxygen debt (DEOx) according to arterial gases compared to the use of iROX in patients with high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy requirement, presenting with acute respiratory failure as a consequence of SARS-CoV-2 infection. In addition, we aimed to identify the factors associated with the need for orotracheal intubation (OTI). METHODS: A retrospective observational cohort study of a database collected from patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted to intensive care units with AHRF and had received HFNC upon admission during the Covid-19 pandemic (March 23, 2020 through August 02, 2021). The variables of interest were factors determining the predictive ability of DEOx and iROX. We used a multiple logarithmic regression model to correct for confounding and mixed-effects variables, and validated for OTI in patients treated with HFNC. RESULTS: From a total of 373 patients treated with HFNC, 317 patients (84.9%) required invasive mechanical ventilation. APACHE II (AOR 1.44; 95% CI: 1.14-1.83, p 0,032), vasopressor use (AOR 27.7; 95% CI: 1.83 - 420,63, p 0,017), and DEOx (AOR 1.26; 95% CI: 1.10 - 1.44, p 0,001) were associated with the need for intubation. The predictive model between iROX and DEOx evidenced an AUC of 0.535 vs. 0.606, respectively, with a DEOx cut off point of 7.14 (±10.16, p < 0.01). DEOx as an independent factor of OTI presents an OR 2,48 with cut point 4.5 mlO2/kg (AUC 0.780, CI 95%, 0.753 - 0.808, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: DEOx is a valuable measurment to identify the need for OTI in patients with SARS-CoV-2 who were under management with HFNC with a predictive value superior to iROX, being a reproducible and valid quantitative method for the need OTI that can be implemented in other critically illconditions. Further studies are required to characterize the usefulness of DEOx more precisely.

Advanced Respiratory Support Days as a Novel Marker of Mortality in COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Requiring Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

Emerging evidence suggests prolonged use of noninvasive respiratory support may increase mortality of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome who require extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Using a database of adults receiving ECMO for COVID-19, we calculated survival curves and multivariable Cox regression to determine the risk of death associated with pre-ECMO use of high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO), noninvasive ventilation (NIV), and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) days. We investigated the performance of a novel variable, advanced respiratory support days (composite of HFNO, NIV, and IMV days), on Respiratory ECMO Survival Prediction (RESP) score. Subjects (N = 146) with increasing advanced respiratory support days (<5, 5-9, and ≥10) had a stepwise increase in 90 day mortality (32.2%, 57.7%, and 75.4%, respectively; p = 0.002). Ninety-day mortality was significantly higher in subjects (N = 121) receiving NIV >4 days (81.8% vs. 52.4%, p < 0.001). Each additional pre-ECMO advanced respiratory support day increased the odds of right ventricular failure (odds ratio [OR]: 1.066, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.002-1.135) and in-hospital mortality (1.17, 95% CI: 1.08-1.27). Substituting advanced respiratory support days for IMV days improved RESP score mortality prediction (area under the curve (AUC) or: 0.64 vs. 0.71). Pre-ECMO advanced respiratory support days were associated with increased 90 day mortality compared with IMV days alone. Adjusting the RESP score for advanced respiratory support days improved mortality prediction.

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).

Non-invasive ventilation in the care of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with palliative care needs: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) could have palliative care (PC) needs because of unmet needs such as dyspnoea. This may lead to anxiety and may have an impact on patients' ability to perform daily activities of living. PC can be started when patients with COPD have unmet needs and can be provided alongside disease-modifying therapies. Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) could be an important measure to manage dyspnoea in patients with COPD in need of PC. A scoping review was conducted to gain an overview of the existing research and to identify knowledge gaps. The aim of this scoping review was to systematically map published studies on the use of NIV in patients with COPD with PC needs, including the perspectives and experiences of patients, families, and healthcare professionals (HCPs). METHODS: This review was conducted following the framework of Arksey and O'Malley. The reporting of the review was guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. The review protocol was published. AMED, CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PEDro, and PsycInfo were searched from inception to November 14, 2022. The included studies had to report the perspectives and experiences of COPD patients, relatives, and HCPs regarding NIV in the care of patients with COPD with PC needs. In pairs, the authors independently assessed studies' eligibility and extracted data. The data were organised thematically. The results were discussed in a consultation exercise. RESULTS: This review included 33 papers from 32 studies. Four thematic groupings were identified: preferences and attitudes towards the use of NIV; patient participation in the decision-making process of NIV treatment; conflicting results on the perceived benefits and burdens of treatment; and heterogenous clinical outcomes in experimental studies. Patients perceived NIV as a 'life buoy' to keep them alive. Many patients wanted to take part in the decision-making process regarding NIV treatment but expressed varying degrees of inclusion by HCPs in such decision-making. Conflicting findings were identified regarding the perceived benefits and burdens of NIV treatment. Diversity in heterogeneous clinical outcomes were reported in experimental studies. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for more studies designed to investigate the effectiveness of NIV as a palliative measure for patients with COPD with PC needs using comprehensive outcomes. It is especially important to gain more knowledge on the experiences of all stakeholders in the use of home-based NIV treatment to these patients.

Pediatric long-term noninvasive respiratory support in children with central nervous system disorders.

RATIONALE: The use of long-term noninvasive respiratory support is increasing in children along with an extension of indications, in particular in children with central nervous system (CNS) disorders. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe the characteristics of children with CNS disorders treated with long-term noninvasive respiratory support in France. METHODS: Data were collected from 27 French pediatric university centers through an anonymous questionnaire filled for every child treated with noninvasive ventilatory support ≥3 months on 1st June 2019. MAIN RESULTS: The data of 182 patients (55% boys, median age: 10.2 [5.4;14.8] years old [range: 0.3-25]) were collected: 35 (19%) patients had nontumoral spinal cord injury, 22 (12%) CNS tumors, 63 (35%) multiple disabilities, 26 (14%) central alveolar hypoventilation and 36 (20%) other CNS disorders. Seventy five percent of the patients were treated with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) and 25% with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). The main investigations performed before CPAP/NIV initiation were nocturnal gas exchange recordings, alone or coupled with poly(somno)graphy (in 29% and 34% of the patients, respectively). CPAP/NIV was started in an acute setting in 10% of the patients. Median adherence was 8 [6;10] hours/night, with 12% of patients using treatment <4 h/day. Nasal mask was the most common interface (70%). Airway clearance techniques were used by 31% of patients. CONCLUSION: CPAP/NIV may be a therapeutic option in children with CNS disorders. Future studies should assess treatment efficacy and patient reported outcome measures.

Effect of different noninvasive ventilation interfaces on the prevention of facial pressure injury: A network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of different noninvasive ventilation interfaces on preventing the facial pressure injury. METHODS: This network meta-analysis was conducted following the PRISMA reporting guidelines. Seven electronic databases were systematically searched for randomised controlled trials about the comparative effectiveness of different interfaces in preventing facial pressure injury with noninvasive ventilation in adults and newborns from inception to June 2023. The acronym of PICOS was used and the keywords as well as inclusion/exclusion criteria were determined. Study selection and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. The Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool was used to assess the methodological quality. RESULTS: A total of 78 randomised controlled trials involving 7,291 patients were included. The results of network meta-analysis showed that the effectiveness of the eight noninvasive ventilation interfaces on the prevention of facial pressure injury was in the order of: nasal cannula > full-face mask > rotation of nasal mask with nasal prongs > helmet > nasal mask > oronasal mask > nasal prongs > face mask. The use of full-face mask in adults and nasal cannula in newborns had the best effect on preventing the incidence of facial pressure injury. CONCLUSIONS: The use of full-face mask in adults and nasal cannula in newborns had the most clinical advantage in preventing the incidence of facial pressure injury and were worthy promoting in clinical practice. IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE: This study provides a certain theoretical basis for the selection of appropriate interface for patients with noninvasive ventilation. Clinical practitioners should choose the appropriate interfaces based on the patient's specific condition to reduce the incidence of facial pressure injury, enhance patient comfort, and improve the effectiveness of respiratory therapy.

Nutrition practices in hospitalized adults receiving noninvasive forms of respiratory support: A scoping review.

The use of noninvasive respiratory support is increasing, with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) and high-flow nasal cannula providing unique barriers to nutrition support. Limited data related to nutrition management for these patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) exist; however, the literature in non-critically ill patients is not well described, and its improvement may help to inform practice within the ICU. Therefore, a scoping review was conducted of MEDLINE, EmCare, and Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases on August 18, 2022, to identify original publications that included adult patients receiving noninvasive respiratory support in a hospital setting with data related to nutrition management. Data were extracted on study design, population, details of respiratory support, and concepts relating to nutrition management (grouped into nutrition screening, assessment, delivery route, intake, and anthropometry). Eleven studies were included, most of which were small (<100 patients), single-center, observational trials in patients receiving NIV only. Five studies reported results related to route of nutrition and nutrition assessment, two on anthropometry, and one each on quantifying intake and nutrition screening; some studies reported multiple parameters. There was a lack of consensus regarding the ideal method for nutrition assessment and route of nutrition. Oral nutrition was the route most frequently reported, yet calorie and protein delivery via this route were inadequate, and barriers to intake included poor appetite, fatigue, and patient cognition. Future research should address barriers pertinent to this population and the impact of nutrition on outcomes.