BACKGROUND Whether noninvasive ventilation should be administered in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure is debated. Therapy with high-flow oxygen through a nasal cannula may offer an alternative in patients with hypoxemia. METHODS We performed a multicenter, open-label trial in which we randomly assigned patients without hypercapnia who had acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and a ratio of the partial pressure of arterial oxygen to the fraction of inspired oxygen of 300 mm Hg or less to high-flow oxygen therapy, standard oxygen therapy delivered through a face mask, or noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients intubated at day 28; secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality in the intensive care unit and at 90 days and the number of ventilator-free days at day 28. RESULTS A total of 310 patients were included in the analyses. The intubation rate (primary outcome) was 38% (40 of 106 patients) in the high-flow–oxygen group, 47% (44 of 94) in the standard group, and 50% (55 of 110) in the noninvasive-ventilation group (P = 0.18 for all comparisons). The number of ventilator-free days at day 28 was significantly higher in the high-flow–oxygen group (24±8 days, vs. 22±10 in the standard-oxygen group and 19±12 in the noninvasive-ventilation group; P = 0.02 for all comparisons). The hazard ratio for death at 90 days was 2.01 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01 to 3.99) with standard oxygen versus high-flow oxygen (P = 0.046) and 2.50 (95% CI, 1.31 to 4.78) with noninvasive ventilation versus high-flow oxygen (P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS In patients with nonhypercapnic acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, treatment with high-flow oxygen, standard oxygen, or noninvasive ventilation did not result in significantly different intubation rates. There was a significant difference in favor of high-flow oxygen in 90-day mortality. (Funded by the Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique Interregional 2010 of the French Ministry of Health; FLORALI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01320384.)

/pdf/high-flow-oxygen-through-nasal-cannula-in-acute-hypoxemic-v8bd6rcsa1.pdf

High-flow oxygen through nasal cannula in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.

Intubation in patients with respiratory failure can be avoided by high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) use. However, it is unclear whether waiting until HFNC fails, which would delay intubation, has adverse effects. The present retrospective observational study assessed overall ICU mortality and other hospital outcomes of patients who received HFNC therapy that failed. All consecutive patients in one tertiary hospital who received HFNC therapy that failed and who then required intubation between January 2013 and March 2014 were enrolled and classified according to whether intubation started early (within 48 h) or late (at least 48 h) after commencing HFNC. Of the 175 enrolled patients, 130 (74.3 %) and 45 (25.7 %) were intubated before and after 48 h of HFNC, respectively. The groups were similar in terms of most baseline characteristics. The early intubated patients had better overall ICU mortality (39.2 vs. 66.7 %; P = 0.001) than late intubated patients. A similar pattern was seen with extubation success (37.7 vs. 15.6 %; P = 0.006), ventilator weaning (55.4 vs. 28.9 %; P = 0.002), and ventilator-free days (8.6 ± 10.1 vs. 3.6 ± 7.5; P = 0.011). In propensity-adjusted and -matched analysis, early intubation was also associated with better overall ICU mortality [adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 0.317, P = 0.005; matched OR = 0.369, P = 0.046]. Failure of HFNC might cause delayed intubation and worse clinical outcomes in patients with respiratory failure. Large prospective and randomized controlled studies on HFNC failure are needed to draw a definitive conclusion.

/pdf/failure-of-high-flow-nasal-cannula-therapy-may-delay-2mdn9ccxal.pdf

Failure of high-flow nasal cannula therapy may delay intubation and increase mortality

Importance High-flow conditioned oxygen therapy delivered through nasal cannulae and noninvasive mechanical ventilation (NIV) may reduce the need for reintubation. Among the advantages of high-flow oxygen therapy are comfort, availability, lower costs, and additional physiopathological mechanisms. Objective To test if high-flow conditioned oxygen therapy is noninferior to NIV for preventing postextubation respiratory failure and reintubation in patients at high risk of reintubation. Design, Setting, and Participants Multicenter randomized clinical trial in 3 intensive care units in Spain (September 2012-October 2014) including critically ill patients ready for planned extubation with at least 1 of the following high-risk factors for reintubation: older than 65 years; Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score higher than 12 points on extubation day; body mass index higher than 30; inadequate secretions management; difficult or prolonged weaning; more than 1 comorbidity; heart failure as primary indication for mechanical ventilation; moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; airway patency problems; or prolonged mechanical ventilation. Interventions Patients were randomized to undergo either high-flow conditioned oxygen therapy or NIV for 24 hours after extubation. Main Outcomes and Measures Primary outcomes were reintubation and postextubation respiratory failure within 72 hours. Noninferiority margin was 10 percentage points. Secondary outcomes included respiratory infection, sepsis, and multiple organ failure, length of stay and mortality; adverse events; and time to reintubation. Results Of 604 patients (mean age, 65 [SD, 16] years; 388 [64%] men), 314 received NIV and 290 high-flow oxygen. Sixty-six patients (22.8%) in the high-flow group vs 60 (19.1%) in the NIV group were reintubated (absolute difference, −3.7%; 95% CI, −9.1% to ∞); 78 patients (26.9%) in the high-flow group vs 125 (39.8%) in the NIV group experienced postextubation respiratory failure (risk difference, 12.9%; 95% CI, 6.6% to ∞). Median time to reintubation did not significantly differ: 26.5 hours (IQR, 14-39 hours) in the high-flow group vs 21.5 hours (IQR, 10-47 hours) in the NIV group (absolute difference, −5 hours; 95% CI, −34 to 24 hours). Median postrandomization ICU length of stay was lower in the high-flow group, 3 days (IQR, 2-7) vs 4 days (IQR, 2-9; P =.048). Other secondary outcomes were similar in the 2 groups. Adverse effects requiring withdrawal of the therapy were observed in none of patients in the high-flow group vs 42.9% patients in the NIV group ( P Conclusions and Relevance Among high-risk adults who have undergone extubation, high-flow conditioned oxygen therapy was not inferior to NIV for preventing reintubation and postextubation respiratory failure. High-flow conditioned oxygen therapy may offer advantages for these patients. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier:NCT01191489

/pdf/effect-of-postextubation-high-flow-nasal-cannula-vs-3cngfw3l4e.pdf

Effect of Postextubation High-Flow Nasal Cannula vs Noninvasive Ventilation on Reintubation and Postextubation Respiratory Failure in High-Risk Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance Studies of mechanically ventilated critically ill patients that combine populations that are at high and low risk for reintubation suggest that conditioned high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy after extubation improves oxygenation compared with conventional oxygen therapy. However, conclusive data about reintubation are lacking. Objective To determine whether high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy is superior to conventional oxygen therapy for preventing reintubation in mechanically ventilated patients at low risk for reintubation. Design, Setting, and Participants Multicenter randomized clinical trial conducted between September 2012 and October 2014 in 7 intensive care units (ICUs) in Spain. Participants were 527 adult critical patients at low risk for reintubation who fulfilled criteria for planned extubation. Low risk for reintubation was defined as younger than 65 years; Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score less than 12 on day of extubation; body mass index less than 30; adequate secretions management; simple weaning; 0 or 1 comorbidity; and absence of heart failure, moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, airway patency problems, and prolonged mechanical ventilation. Interventions Patients were randomized to undergo either high-flow or conventional oxygen therapy for 24 hours after extubation. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was reintubation within 72 hours, compared with the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel χ 2 test. Secondary outcomes included postextubation respiratory failure, respiratory infection, sepsis and multiorgan failure, ICU and hospital length of stay and mortality, adverse events, and time to reintubation. Results Of 527 patients (mean age, 51 years [range, 18-64]; 62% men), 264 received high-flow therapy and 263 conventional oxygen therapy. Reintubation within 72 hours was less common in the high-flow group (13 patients [4.9%] vs 32 [12.2%] in the conventional group; absolute difference, 7.2% [95% CI, 2.5% to 12.2%]; P  = .004). Postextubation respiratory failure was less common in the high-flow group (22/264 patients [8.3%] vs 38/263 [14.4%] in the conventional group; absolute difference, 6.1% [95% CI, 0.7% to 11.6%]; P  = .03). Time to reintubation was not significantly different between groups (19 hours [interquartile range, 12-28] in the high-flow group vs 15 hours [interquartile range, 9-31] in the conventional group; absolute difference, −4 [95% CI, −54 to 46]; P  = .66]. No adverse effects were reported. Conclusions and Relevance Among extubated patients at low risk for reintubation, the use of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen compared with conventional oxygen therapy reduced the risk of reintubation within 72 hours. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier:NCT01191489

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/articlepdf/2503420/joi160026.pdf

Effect of Postextubation High-Flow Nasal Cannula vs Conventional Oxygen Therapy on Reintubation in Low-Risk Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial

RESULTS High-flow nasal oxygen therapy was not inferior to BiPAP: the treatment failed in 87 of 414 patients with high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (21.0%) and 91 of 416 patients with BiPAP (21.9%) (absolute difference, 0.9%; 95% CI, −4.9% to 6.6%; P = .003). No significant differences were found for intensive care unit mortality (23 patients with BiPAP [5.5%] and 28 with high-flow nasal oxygen therapy [6.8%]; P = .66) (absolute difference, 1.2% [95% CI, -2.3% to 4.8%]. Skin breakdown was significantly more common with BiPAP after 24 hours (10% vs 3%; 95% CI, 7.3%-13.4% vs 1.8%-5.6%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among cardiothoracic surgery patients with or at risk for respiratory failure, the use of high-flow nasal oxygen therapy compared with intermittent BiPAP did not result in a worse rate of treatment failure. The findings support the use of high-flow nasal oxygen therapy in similar patients.

/pdf/high-flow-nasal-oxygen-vs-noninvasive-positive-airway-3aqh6pnac2.pdf

High-Flow Nasal Oxygen vs Noninvasive Positive Airway Pressure in Hypoxemic Patients After Cardiothoracic Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Rationale Oxygen is commonly administered after extubation. Although several devices are available, data about their clinical efficacy are scarce. Objectives To compare the effects of the Venturi mask and the nasal high-flow (NHF) therapy on PaO2/FiO2SET ratio after extubation. Secondary endpoints were to assess effects on patient discomfort, adverse events, and clinical outcomes. Methods Randomized, controlled, open-label trial on 105 patients with a PaO2/FiO2 ratio less than or equal to 300 immediately before extubation. The Venturi mask (n = 52) or NHF (n = 53) were applied for 48 hours postextubation. Measurements and main results PaO2/FiO2SET, patient discomfort caused by the interface and by symptoms of airways dryness (on a 10-point numerical rating scale), interface displacements, oxygen desaturations, need for ventilator support, and reintubation were assessed up to 48 hours after extubation. From the 24th hour, PaO2/FiO2SET was higher with the NHF (287 ± 74 vs. 247 ± 81 at 24 h; P = 0.03). Discomfort related both to the interface and to airways dryness was better with NHF (respectively, 2.6 ± 2.2 vs. 5.1 ± 3.3 at 24 h, P = 0.006; 2.2 ± 1.8 vs. 3.7 ± 2.4 at 24 h, P = 0.002). Fewer patients had interface displacements (32% vs. 56%; P = 0.01), oxygen desaturations (40% vs. 75%; P Conclusions Compared with the Venturi mask, NHF results in better oxygenation for the same set FiO2 after extubation. Use of NHF is associated with better comfort, fewer desaturations and interface displacements, and a lower reintubation rate. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 01575353).

Nasal high-flow versus Venturi mask oxygen therapy after extubation. Effects on oxygenation, comfort, and clinical outcome

Decompressive craniectomy (DC) has been regarded as an ultima ratio measure in the treatment of refractory intracranial hypertension after brain injury. Most discussion about its benefits is based on studies performed in patients who are <65 years of age. The aim of this study was to identify patients aged ≥66 years who underwent DC after traumatic brain injury (TBI), in order to assess patient outcome and to correlate the values of potential predictors of survival on prognosis. From January 2002 to December 2009, 44 patients aged ≥66 underwent DC (follow-up, 12–102 months). Potential predictors of outcome were analyzed, including age, post-resuscitation Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score, presence of mass lesion, Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II, Injury Severity Score (ISS), and timing of surgical decompression. Mortality was 48% at discharge from the intensive care unit (ICU), 57% at hospital discharge, and 77% at 1-year follow-up and at last follow-up. A bad outcome Glasgow Outcome Scal...

Decompressive craniectomy for elderly patients with traumatic brain injury: it's probably not worth the while.

Oxygen therapy, usually delivered with the Venturi mask, is frequently used in critically ill patients after extubation. This device delivers low-flow oxygen with cold humidification. Recently available is a new device for oxygen therapy through nasal cannulae (NHF). Such a device delivers up to 60 l/minute oxygen, with heated humidification. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of these two devices for oxygen therapy on arterial blood gases, discomfort and adverse events in critically ill patients after extubation.

/pdf/high-flow-oxygen-therapy-through-nasal-cannulae-versus-low-37yu58lque.pdf

High-flow oxygen therapy through nasal cannulae versus low-flow oxygen therapy via Venturi mask after extubation in adult, critically ill patients

This study aims to test the association of an increased mortality in critically ill patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa in patients with a previous respiratory tract colonization by Candida spp. compared with that of patients with a VAP by P. aeruginosa without Candida spp. isolation.

/pdf/ventilator-associated-pneumonia-caused-by-pseudomonas-29r0wr0gh1.pdf

Rossano Festa

Papers

Nasal high-flow versus Venturi mask oxygen therapy after extubation. Effects on oxygenation, comfort, and clinical outcome

Decompressive craniectomy for elderly patients with traumatic brain injury: it's probably not worth the while.

High-flow oxygen therapy through nasal cannulae versus low-flow oxygen therapy via Venturi mask after extubation in adult, critically ill patients

Ventilator-associated pneumonia caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa and respiratory colonization by Candida spp

Tapia's Syndrome: Clinical Insights.