Nasal high flow or noninvasive ventilation? navigating hypercapnic COPD exacerbation treatment: A randomized noninferiority clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) has been the cornerstone for managing acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD) with hypercapnic respiratory failure. Nasal high flow (NHF) oxygen therapy has emerged as a potential alternative, offering a more tolerable modality with promising outcomes. The aim of the present study was to evaluate whether NHF respiratory support is noninferior to NIV with respect to treatment failure, in patients with mild-to-moderate hypercapnic AECOPD. METHODS: In this multi-center, randomized, noninferiority trial, 105 patients with AECOPD and respiratory failure type II were enrolled. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either NHF therapy or NIV. The primary endpoint was the frequency of treatment failure, defined as the need for intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation or a switch to the alternative treatment group. Secondary endpoints included changes in respiratory parameters, patient comfort indicators, and the occurrence of complications. RESULTS: The findings revealed no significant difference in the primary outcome between the groups, with a treatment failure rate of 19.6 % (10 out of 51) in the NHF group and 14.8 % (8 out of 54) in the NIV group. Interestingly, NHF users reported significantly lower levels of dyspnea and discomfort at multiple follow-up points. Despite the differences in patient comfort, respiratory parameters such as respiratory rate, arterial blood gases, and use of accessory muscles of respiration showed no significant disparities between the groups throughout the study period. CONCLUSIONS: NHF therapy was similar to NIV in preventing treatment failure among patients with hypercapnic AECOPD, offering a viable alternative with enhanced comfort. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was prospectively registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT03466385) on March 15, 2018.

From flatline to lifeline: A scoping review of the Lazarus phenomenon.

BACKGROUND: The Lazarus phenomenon or autoresuscitation (autoROSC) is the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) after the termination of the cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) efforts. PURPOSE: The purpose of the current scoping review is to present the available data in the literature regarding autoROSC. METHODS: We reviewed four scientific databases to identify all studies which reported autoROSC cases in patients who underwent CPR. We then extracted all information relevant to CPR and autoROSC. The review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews. RESULTS: We identified 66 studies describing 76 autoROSC cases. The majority of cardiac arrests were in-hospital (44, 57.89%). Median time from termination of CPR to autoROSC was 5 min. Regarding the outcome, 52 (77.61%) patients died and 11 (14.47%) patients had intact neurological outcome. A higher mortality rate was identified in patients with respiratory comorbidities. Overall, 24 (31.58%) patients survived. CONCLUSION: AutoROSC is probably an under-reported event in the medical community. Healthcare professionals should be aware of the phenomenon and actively monitor for it, when appropriate.