[Exertion heat stroke and acute liver insufficiency].

J. Saïssy,B. Pats,Y. Auroy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0750-7658(97)86425-8

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Effectiveness of an adapted diving mask (Owner mask) for non-invasive ventilation in the COVID-19 pandemic scenario: study protocol for a randomized clinical trial

Dulciane Nunes Paiva,Litiele Evelin Wagner,Sônia Elvira dos Santos Marinho,Carlos Fernando Drumond Dornelles,Juliana Fernandes de Souza Barbosa,Patrícia Érika de Melo Marinho

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06133-y

IF: 2.728

2022-03-18

Trials

Abstract:Abstract Background Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) is indicated to avoid orotracheal intubation (OTI) to reduce hospital stay and mortality. Patients infected by SARS-CoV2 can progress to respiratory failure (RF); however, in the initial phase, they can be submitted to oxygen therapy and NIV. Such resources can produce aerosol and can cause a high risk of contagion to health professionals. Safe NIV strategies are sought, and therefore, the authors adapted diving masks to be used as NIV masks (called an Owner mask). Objective To assess the Owner mask safety and effectiveness regarding conventional orofacial mask for patients in respiratory failure with and without confirmation or suspicion of COVID-19. Methods A Brazilian multicentric study to assess patients admitted to the intensive care unit regarding their clinical, sociodemographic and anthropometric data. The primary outcome will be the rate of tracheal intubation, and secondary outcomes will include in-hospital mortality, the difference in PaO 2 /FiO 2 ratio and PaCO 2 levels, time in the intensive care unit and hospitalization time, adverse effects, degree of comfort and level of satisfaction of the mask use, success rate of NIV (not progressing to OTI), and behavior of the ventilatory variables obtained in NIV with an Owner mask and with a conventional face mask. Patients with COVID-19 and clinical signs indicative of RF will be submitted to NIV with an Owner mask [NIV Owner COVID Group ( n = 63)] or with a conventional orofacial mask [NIV orofacial COVID Group ( n = 63)], and those patients in RF due to causes not related to COVID-19 will be allocated into the NIV Owner Non-COVID Group ( n = 97) or to the NIV Orofacial Non-COVID Group ( n = 97) in a randomized way, which will total 383 patients, admitting 20% for loss to follow-up. Discussion This is the first randomized and controlled trial during the COVID-19 pandemic about the safety and effectiveness of the Owner mask compared to the conventional orofacial mask. Experimental studies have shown that the Owner mask enables adequate sealing on the patient’s face and the present study is relevant as it aims to minimize the aerosolization of the virus in the environment and improve the safety of health professionals. Trial registration Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (ReBEC): RBR – 7xmbgsz . Registered on 15 April 2021.

medicine, research & experimental
Benefits and risks of noninvasive oxygenation strategy in COVID-19: a multicenter, prospective cohort study (COVID-ICU) in 137 hospitals

COVID-ICU group, for the REVA network, COVID-ICU investigators

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-021-03784-2

2021-12-08

Abstract:Rational: To evaluate the respective impact of standard oxygen, high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) on oxygenation failure rate and mortality in COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). Methods: Multicenter, prospective cohort study (COVID-ICU) in 137 hospitals in France, Belgium, and Switzerland. Demographic, clinical, respiratory support, oxygenation failure, and survival data were collected. Oxygenation failure was defined as either intubation or death in the ICU without intubation. Variables independently associated with oxygenation failure and Day-90 mortality were assessed using multivariate logistic regression. Results: From February 25 to May 4, 2020, 4754 patients were admitted in ICU. Of these, 1491 patients were not intubated on the day of ICU admission and received standard oxygen therapy (51%), HFNC (38%), or NIV (11%) (P < 0.001). Oxygenation failure occurred in 739 (50%) patients (678 intubation and 61 death). For standard oxygen, HFNC, and NIV, oxygenation failure rate was 49%, 48%, and 60% (P < 0.001). By multivariate analysis, HFNC (odds ratio [OR] 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36-0.99, P = 0.013) but not NIV (OR 1.57, 95% CI 0.78-3.21) was associated with a reduction in oxygenation failure). Overall 90-day mortality was 21%. By multivariable analysis, HFNC was not associated with a change in mortality (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.61-1.33), while NIV was associated with increased mortality (OR 2.75, 95% CI 1.79-4.21, P < 0.001). Conclusion: In patients with COVID-19, HFNC was associated with a reduction in oxygenation failure without improvement in 90-day mortality, whereas NIV was associated with a higher mortality in these patients. Randomized controlled trials are needed.
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

Amanda Pereira da Cruz,Gloria Martins,Camila Marinelli Martins,Victoria Marques,Samantha Christovam,Denise Battaglini,Chiara Robba,Paolo Pelosi,Patricia Rieken Macedo Rocco,Fernanda Ferreira Cruz,Cynthia dos Santos Samary,Pedro Leme Silva

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40001-024-01826-3

IF: 4.981

2024-04-24

European Journal of Medical Research

Abstract: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.

medicine, research & experimental
Effect of Noninvasive Respiratory Strategies on Intubation or Mortality Among Patients With Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure and COVID-19: The RECOVERY-RS Randomized Clinical Trial

Gavin D Perkins,Chen Ji,Bronwen A Connolly,Keith Couper,Ranjit Lall,J Kenneth Baillie,Judy M Bradley,Paul Dark,Chirag Dave,Anthony De Soyza,Anna V Dennis,Anne Devrell,Sara Fairbairn,Hakim Ghani,Ellen A Gorman,Christopher A Green,Nicholas Hart,Siew Wan Hee,Zoe Kimbley,Shyam Madathil,Nicola McGowan,Benjamin Messer,Jay Naisbitt,Chloe Norman,Dhruv Parekh,Emma M Parkin,Jaimin Patel,Scott E Regan,Clare Ross,Anthony J Rostron,Mohammad Saim,Anita K Simonds,Emma Skilton,Nigel Stallard,Michael Steiner,Rama Vancheeswaran,Joyce Yeung,Daniel F McAuley,RECOVERY-RS Collaborators

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2022.0028

IF: 11.816

2022-02-08

JAMA

Abstract:Importance: Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) have been recommended for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure in patients with COVID-19. Uncertainty exists regarding the effectiveness and safety of these noninvasive respiratory strategies. Objective: To determine whether either CPAP or HFNO, compared with conventional oxygen therapy, improves clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19-related acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. Design, setting, and participants: A parallel group, adaptive, randomized clinical trial of 1273 hospitalized adults with COVID-19-related acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. The trial was conducted between April 6, 2020, and May 3, 2021, across 48 acute care hospitals in the UK and Jersey. Final follow-up occurred on June 20, 2021. Interventions: Adult patients were randomized to receive CPAP (n = 380), HFNO (n = 418), or conventional oxygen therapy (n = 475). Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was a composite of tracheal intubation or mortality within 30 days. Results: The trial was stopped prematurely due to declining COVID-19 case numbers in the UK and the end of the funded recruitment period. Of the 1273 randomized patients (mean age, 57.4 [95% CI, 56.7 to 58.1] years; 66% male; 65% White race), primary outcome data were available for 1260. Crossover between interventions occurred in 17.1% of participants (15.3% in the CPAP group, 11.5% in the HFNO group, and 23.6% in the conventional oxygen therapy group). The requirement for tracheal intubation or mortality within 30 days was significantly lower with CPAP (36.3%; 137 of 377 participants) vs conventional oxygen therapy (44.4%; 158 of 356 participants) (absolute difference, -8% [95% CI, -15% to -1%], P = .03), but was not significantly different with HFNO (44.3%; 184 of 415 participants) vs conventional oxygen therapy (45.1%; 166 of 368 participants) (absolute difference, -1% [95% CI, -8% to 6%], P = .83). Adverse events occurred in 34.2% (130/380) of participants in the CPAP group, 20.6% (86/418) in the HFNO group, and 13.9% (66/475) in the conventional oxygen therapy group. Conclusions and relevance: Among patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19, an initial strategy of CPAP significantly reduced the risk of tracheal intubation or mortality compared with conventional oxygen therapy, but there was no significant difference between an initial strategy of HFNO compared with conventional oxygen therapy. The study may have been underpowered for the comparison of HFNO vs conventional oxygen therapy, and early study termination and crossover among the groups should be considered when interpreting the findings. Trial registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN16912075.
Addition of Mask to High-flow Nasal Oxygen: A Strategy to Improve Oxygenation in Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure Secondary to COVID-19

Suhail Mantoo,Umar Hafiz Khan,Ruhail Qadir Bhat,Tajamul Hussain Shah,Farhana Siraj,Afshan Shabir,Nazia Mehfooz,Syed Mudasir Qadri,Muzaffar Bindroo,Ajaz Nabi Koul,Mushtaq Ahmad,Fayaz Ahmad Sofi,Sonaullah Shah,Rafi Ahmed Jan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.59556/japi.72.0411

Abstract:Purpose: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNO) reduces the need for invasive mechanical ventilation in COVID-19 patients with hypoxemic-respiratory failure. During HFNO entrainment of room air dilutes the delivered fractional inspiratory oxygen (FiO2), thereby preventing improvement in oxygenation. The placement of a mask over HFNO to improve oxygenation has provided conflicting results. We aimed to determine and compare the effect of placing various mask types over HFNO on oxygen saturation (SPO2). Materials and methods: In this prospective physiological study 40 patients with COVID-19-associated hypoxemic respiratory failure on HFNO with O2 concentration <92% were included. The effect of placing different masks over HFNO on oxygenation, respiratory rate, heart rate, blood pressure, patient comfort, and partial pressure of carbon dioxide level (pCO2) was recorded after a prespecified time interval. Results: We observed a significantly higher mean SPO2 and lower mean respiratory rate on using various study masks over HFNO compared to HFNO alone. On comparing various mask types, the use of N95 masks and nonrebreather (NRB) masks with O2 showed a significant increase in O2 concentration and reduction in respiratory rate compared to surgical mask (SM) and NRB without O2. The proportion of patients who achieved SPO2 of >92% was higher with the use of N95 masks (47.5%) or NRB with O2 (45%) over HFNO compared to SM (35%) and NRB without O2 (35%). No significant change was observed in heart rate, blood pressure, and CO2 level with the use of any mask over HFNO. Conclusion: This study demonstrates improvement in oxygenation and reduction in respiratory rate with the use of various masks over HFNO in patients of COVID-19-related hypoxemic-respiratory-failure. Significantly greater benefit was achieved with the use of N95 or NRB with O2 compared to SM or NRB without O2.
Comparison of High Flow Nasal Cannula and Continuous Positive Airway Pressure in COVID-19 Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Critical Care Unit: A Randomized Control Study

Gunaseelan Mirunalini,Kuppusamy Anand,Anand Pushparani,Gunasri Kadirvelu,ANAND KUPPUSAMY

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.45798

2023-09-22

Cureus

Abstract:Background and objective Acute hypoxic respiratory failure in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia has been treated with oxygen delivered by oxygen masks and non-invasive ventilation (NIV) with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), and more recently with high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) devices. There is a paucity of randomized controlled trials to compare the efficacy of CPAP with HFNC in COVID-19 pneumonia. We conceptualized a randomized control study to compare the efficacy of HFNC and CPAP in reducing the need for invasive mechanical ventilation, estimation of mechanical ventilation-free days, and risk of intubation in COVID-19 patients with hypoxic respiratory failure. Methodology One hundred consecutive patients who satisfied the inclusion criteria were included in the trial. The patients were then randomly allocated to receive either CPAP or HFNC with settings as per the study protocol. The patients were deemed to have achieved the study endpoint when they were intubated due to any reason or successfully weaned from NIV to conventional oxygen therapies. The number of patients who required invasive ventilation and the number of invasive ventilation-free days were recorded and analyzed. Results Nineteen (38%) patients in the CPAP group and 30 (60%) patients in the HFNC group required invasive mechanical ventilation and the difference was statistically significant (p = 0.03, 95%CI: 0.1829-0.9129). The median number of days free of invasive mechanical ventilation in the CPAP group (median=5 (interquartile range (IQR(=5,6)) was more than in the HFNC group (median=4 (IQR=3,4)) and this difference was statistically significant (p<0.000). The secondary analysis of risk evaluation for intubation done using the Cox regression model showed no significant factors that could have contributed to intubation in the study population. The Kaplan-Meyer curve was used to express the probability of a patient getting intubated and the calculated hazard ratio was 2.29. Conclusion The administration of CPAP significantly reduced the intubation rate and prolonged invasive mechanical ventilation-free period in COVID-19 patients with hypoxic respiratory failure. We also inferred a two-fold increase in the risk of intubation in patients receiving HFNC compared to CPAP.
The Use of High-Flow Nasal Cannula in the Emergency Department and a Comparison of Its Efficacy With Noninvasive Ventilation

Varsha Shinde,Sharmila J Mavudelli

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.65709

2024-07-29

Cureus

Abstract:Background: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygenation has emerged as a convenient and handy oxygenation mode over the past few years, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. HFNC is designed to provide humidified oxygen at high flow rates to subjects in a much more patient-compliant method. Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) has been a powerful tool in treating dyspneic patients of different etiologies, yielding positive outcomes over many decades. HFNC has the potential to serve as an alternative to NIV for acutely breathless patients, offering better patient compliance. Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted with a population size of 100 patients. The patients were randomly assigned to HFNC and NIV groups and further compared based on the clinical criteria, arterial oxygen pressure (PaO2)/fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) ratios, and modified Borg score. Simple proportions, mean, standard deviation, and chi-square tests were used. The chi-square test was applied to determine the association between the two attributes. Results: Both HFNC and NIV subset populations have shown substantial improvement in their clinical criteria in terms of respiratory rate, heart rate, oxygen saturation, PaO2/FiO2 ratios, and modified Borg score over two and six hours with statistically significant improvement in oxygen saturations among HFNC subset in comparison to NIV subset (at two hours, p = 0.004; at six hours, p = 0.022). Secondary outcomes like the need for intubation (14% in HFNC, 22% in NIV) and mortality (4% in HFNC, 6% in NIV group) were noted, which were statistically insignificant in comparing their efficacy. Conclusion: The study concluded that HFNC resulted in better clinical parameters than NIV, but the difference was statistically insignificant except for oxygen saturation. Similarly, HFNC resulted in a decreased need for intubation and less mortality compared to NIV.
Role of Non-Invasive Respiratory Supports in COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Failure Patients with Do Not Intubate Orders

Clément Medrinal,Alexis Gillet,Fairuz Boujibar,Jonathan Dugernier,Marcel Zwahlen,Bouchra Lamia,Christophe Girault,Jacques Creteur,Jean-Marc Fellrath,Laurence Haesler,Laurie Lagache,Laure Goubert,Elise Artaud Macari,Olivier Taton,Philippe Gouin,Dimitri Leduc,Olivier Van Hove,Michelle Norrenberg,Guillaume Prieur,Yann Combret,Nils Correvon,Roger Hilfiker,Olivier Contal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10132783

2021-06-24

Abstract:The current gold-standard treatment for COVID-19-related hypoxemic respiratory failure is invasive mechanical ventilation. However, do not intubate orders (DNI), prevent the use of this treatment in some cases. The aim of this study was to evaluate if non-invasive ventilatory supports can provide a good therapeutic alternative to invasive ventilation in patients with severe COVID-19 infection and a DNI. Data were collected from four centres in three European countries. Patients with severe COVID-19 infection were included. We emulated a hypothetical target trial in which outcomes were compared in patients with a DNI order treated exclusively by non-invasive respiratory support with patients who could be intubated if necessary. We set up a propensity score and an inverse probability of treatment weighting to remove confounding by indication. Four-hundred patients were included: 270 were eligible for intubation and 130 had a DNI order. The adjusted risk ratio for death among patients eligible for intubation was 0.81 (95% CI 0.46 to 1.42). The median length of stay in acute care for survivors was similar between groups (18 (10-31) vs. (19 (13-23.5); p = 0.76). The use of non-invasive respiratory support is a good compromise for patients with severe COVID-19 and a do not intubate order.
The effects of a 2-h trial of high-flow oxygen by nasal cannula versus Venturi mask in immunocompromised patients with hypoxemic acute respiratory failure: a multicenter randomized trial

Virginie Lemiale,Djamel Mokart,Julien Mayaux,Jérôme Lambert,Antoine Rabbat,Alexandre Demoule,Elie Azoulay

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-015-1097-0

2015-11-02

Abstract:Introduction: In immunocompromised patients, acute respiratory failure (ARF) is associated with high mortality, particularly when invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) is required. In patients with severe hypoxemia, high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) therapy has been used as an alternative to delivery of oxygen via a Venturi mask. Our objective in the present study was to compare HFNO and Venturi mask oxygen in immunocompromised patients with ARF. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, parallel-group randomized controlled trial in four intensive care units. Inclusion criteria were hypoxemic ARF and immunosuppression, defined as at least one of the following: solid or hematological malignancy, steroid or other immunosuppressant drug therapy, and HIV infection. Exclusion criteria were hypercapnia, previous IMV, and immediate need for IMV or noninvasive ventilation (NIV). Patients were randomized to 2 h of HFNO or Venturi mask oxygen. Results: The primary endpoint was a need for IMV or NIV during the 2-h oxygen therapy period. Secondary endpoints were comfort, dyspnea, and thirst, as assessed hourly using a 0-10 visual analogue scale. We randomized 100 consecutive patients, including 84 with malignancies, to HFNO (n = 52) or Venturi mask oxygen (n = 48). During the 2-h study treatment period, 12 patients required IMV or NIV, and we found no significant difference between the two groups (15 % with HFNO and 8 % with the Venturi mask, P = 0.36). None of the secondary endpoints differed significantly between the two groups. Conclusions: In immunocompromised patients with hypoxemic ARF, a 2-h trial with HFNO improved neither mechanical ventilatory assistance nor patient comfort compared with oxygen delivered via a Venturi mask. However, the study was underpowered because of the low event rate and the one-sided hypothesis. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02424773 . Registered 20 April 2015.
Combining reservoir mask oxygenation with high-flow nasal cannula in the treatment of hypoxemic respiratory failure among patients with COVID-19 pneumonia: a retrospective cohort study

Ivan Gur,Ronen Zalts,Yaniv Dotan,Khitam Hussain,Ami Neuberger,Eyal Fuchs

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4266/acc.2023.00451

Abstract:Background: Concerns regarding positive-pressure-ventilation for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hypoxemia led the search for alternative oxygenation techniques. This study aimed to assess one such method, dual oxygenation, i.e., the addition of a reservoir mask (RM) on top of a high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC). Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, the records of all patients hospitalized with COVID-19 during 2020-2022 were reviewed. Patients over the age of 18 years with hypoxemia necessitating HFNC were included. Exclusion criteria were positive-pressure-ventilation for any indication other than hypoxemic respiratory failure, transfer to another facility while still on HFNC and "do-not-intubate/resuscitate" orders. The primary outcome was mortality within 30 days from the first application of HFNC. Secondary outcomes were intubation and admission to the intensive care unit. Results: Of 659 patients included in the final analysis, 316 were treated with dual oxygenation and 343 with HFNC alone. Propensity for treatment was estimated based on background diagnoses, laboratories and vital signs upon admission, gender and glucocorticoid dose. Inverse probability of treatment weighted regression including age, body mass index, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score and respiratory rate oxygenation index showed treatment with dual oxygenation to be associated with lower 30-day mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.615; 95% confidence interval, 0.469-0.809). Differences in the secondary outcomes did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions: Our study suggests that the addition of RM on top of HFNC may be associated with decreased mortality in patients with severe COVID-19 hypoxemia.
The development ofAmblyomma americanum andDermacentor variabilis (Acari: Ixodidae) fed on rabbits immunized with tick hemolymph

D. Ben-Yakir,R. Barker

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00578519

Parasitology Research

Abstract:
Breathing pattern, accessory respiratory muscles work, and gas exchange evaluation for prediction of NIV failure in moderate-to-severe COVID-19-associated ARDS after deterioration of respiratory failure outside ICU: the COVID-NIV observational study

Andrey I Yaroshetskiy,Zamira M Merzhoeva,Natalia A Tsareva,Natalia V Trushenko,Galia S Nuralieva,Vasily D Konanykhin,Anna P Krasnoshchekova,Sergey N Avdeev

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-022-01847-7

2022-10-01

Abstract:Background: Data on the efficacy of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) after progression of respiratory failure in patients who have already received oxygen therapy, or CPAP outside ICU is limited. The study aimed to find predictors of NIV failure based on breathing pattern, gas exchange, and accessory respiratory muscles evaluation in patients who progressed to moderate-to-severe COVID-19 ARDS. Methods: This was a prospective observational study in patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19-ARDS on NIV (n = 80) admitted to COVID-ICU of Sechenov University. The combined success rate for conventional oxygen and CPAP outside ICU was 78.6% (440 of 560 patients). The primary endpoints were intubation rate and mortality. We measured respiratory rate, exhaled tidal volume (Vte), mean peak inspiratory flow (PIF), inspiratory time (Ti), PaO2, SpO2, end-tidal carbon dioxide (PETCO2), and Patrick score, and calculated ROX index, PaO2/FiO2, ventilatory ratio, and alveolar dead space (Vdalv/Vt) on Days 1, 3, 5, 7, 10, and 14. For all significant differences between NIV success and failure groups in measured data, we performed ROC analysis. Results: NIV failure rate in ICU after deterioration of respiratory failure outside ICU was 71.3% (n = 57). Patients with the subsequent NIV failure were older at inclusion, more frail, had longer duration of disease before ICU admission, and higher rate of CPAP use outside ICU. ROC-analysis revealed that the following respiratory parameters after 48 h of NIV can serve as a predictors for NIV failure in moderate-to-severe COVID-19-associated ARDS: PaO2/FiO2 < 112 mmHg (AUROC 0.90 (0.93-0.97), p < 0.0001); PETCO2 < 19.5 mmHg (AUROC 0.84 (0.73-0.94), p < 0.0001); VDalv/VT > 0.43 (AUROC 0.78 (0.68-0.90), p < 0.0001); ROX-index < 5.02 (AUROC 0.89 (0.81-0.97), p < 0.0001); Patrick score > 2 points (AUROC 0.87 (0.78-0.96), p = 0.006). Conclusion: In patients who progressed to moderate-to-severe COVID-19-ARDS probability of NIV success rate was about 1/3. Prediction of the NIV failure can be made after 48 h based on ROX index < 5.02, PaO2/FiO2 < 112 mmHg, PETCO2 < 19.5 mmHg, and Patrick score > = 2. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04667923 , registered on 16/12/2020.
Noninvasive ventilation in patients with COVID-19 from the perspective of the risk of contamination: a narrative review

Murilo Rezende Oliveira,Guilherme Dionir Back,Vanessa de Mello Konzen,Adriana Sanches Garcia-Araújo,Cássia da Luz Goulart,Rebeca Nunes Silva,Lia Mara Wibelinger,Snehil Dixit,Ross Arena,Audrey Borghi-Silva

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17476348.2021.2011223

2021-12-27

Expert Review of Respiratory Medicine

Abstract:INTRODUCTION: noninvasive ventilation (NIV) can be a useful resource to treat acute respiratory failure (ARF), which occurs in patients with COVID-19. However, it is important to consider that there are still no clinical studies that have verified the safety of its use in increase of contamination.AREAS COVERED: Given the potential benefits and simultaneous concerns over the use of NIV in patients with COVID-19, further inquiry is necessary to reach a clinical consensus and provide recommendations for safe use, avoiding contamination. In this context, this narrative review, which included articles published in the Embase, SciELO, PEDro, PubMed and Cochrane up to August 2021, is focused to evaluate available studies related to interfaces, types of circuits, recommended filters, cares for the environment and protective factors for NIV use in patients with COVID-19.EXPERT OPINION: The studies analyzed recommend that the use of NIV can be safe: 1) with equipment that allows the use of the helmet as a safer interface; 2) with double circuit and antimicrobial filter in the expiratory branch; 3) in an environment that allows negative pressure, reducing the dispersion of aerosol particles in the environment; 4) the health team must use the recommended PPE to avoid contamination.

respiratory system
Non-invasive ventilation versus high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy with apnoeic oxygenation for preoxygenation before intubation of patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure: a randomised, multicentre, open-label trial

Jean-Pierre Frat,Jean-Damien Ricard,Jean-Pierre Quenot,Nicolas Pichon,Alexandre Demoule,Jean-Marie Forel,Jean-Paul Mira,Rémi Coudroy,Guillaume Berquier,Benoit Voisin,Gwenhaël Colin,Bertrand Pons,Pierre Eric Danin,Jérome Devaquet,Gwenael Prat,Raphaël Clere-Jehl,Franck Petitpas,Emmanuel Vivier,Keyvan Razazi,Mai-Anh Nay,Vincent Souday,Jean Dellamonica,Laurent Argaud,Stephan Ehrmann,Aude Gibelin,Christophe Girault,Pascal Andreu,Philippe Vignon,Laurence Dangers,Stéphanie Ragot,Arnaud W Thille,FLORALI-2 study group,REVA network,Delphine Chatellier,Florence Boissier,Anne Veinstein,René Robert,Céline Deletage-Métreau,Morgane Olivry,Claire Dahyot-Fizelier,Auguste Dargent,Audrey Large,Emmanuelle Begot,Claire Mancia,Maxence Decavele,Martin Dres,Samuel Lehingue,Laurent Papazian,Marine Paul,Nathalie Marin,Matthieu Le Meur,Mohammed Laissy,Anaita Rouzé,Saad Nseir,Matthieu Henry-Lagarrigue,Aihem Yehia,Frédéric Martino,Charles Cerf,Pierre Bailly,Julie Helms,Jean Baptiste Putegnat,Armand Mekontso-Dessap,Thierry Boulain,Pierre Asfar,Séverin Cabasson,Florent Wallet,Kada Klouche,Frédéric Bellec

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(19)30048-7

Abstract:Background: Non-invasive ventilation has never been compared with high-flow oxygen to determine whether it reduces the risk of severe hypoxaemia during intubation. We aimed to determine if preoxygenation with non-invasive ventilation was more efficient than high-flow oxygen in reducing the risk of severe hypoxaemia during intubation. Methods: The FLORALI-2 multicentre, open-label trial was done in 28 intensive care units in France. Adult patients undergoing tracheal intubation for acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure (a partial pressure of arterial oxygen [PaO2] to fraction of inspired oxygen [FiO2] ratio of ≤300 mm Hg) were randomly assigned (1:1; block size, four participants) to non-invasive ventilation or high-flow oxygen during preoxygenation, with stratification by PaO2/FiO2 ratio (≤200 mm Hg vs >200 mm Hg). Key exclusion criteria were intubation for cardiac arrest, altered consciousness (defined as a Glasgow coma score of less than eight points), other contraindications to non-invasive ventilation (recent laryngeal, oesophageal, or gastric surgery, and substantial facial fractures), pulse oximetry not available, pregnant or breastfeeding women, and refusal to participate. The primary outcome was the occurrence of severe hypoxaemia (pulse oximetry <80%) during the procedure, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02668458. Findings: Between April 15, 2016, and Jan 8, 2017, 2079 patients were intubated in the 28 participating units, and 322 were enrolled. We excluded five patients with no recorded data, two who withdrew consent or were under legal protection, one who was not intubated, and one who had a cardiac arrest. Of the 313 patients included in the intention-to-treat analysis, 142 were assigned to non-invasive ventilation and 171 to high-flow oxygen therapy. Severe hypoxaemia occurred in 33 (23%) of 142 patients after preoxygenation with non-invasive ventilation and 47 (27%) of 171 with high-flow oxygen (absolute difference -4·2%, 95% CI -13·7 to 5·5; p=0·39). In the 242 patients with moderate-to-severe hypoxaemia (PaO2/FiO2 ≤200 mm Hg), severe hypoxaemia occurred less frequently after preoxygenation with non-invasive ventilation than with high-flow oxygen (28 [24%] of 117 patients vs 44 [35%] of 125; adjusted odds ratio 0·56, 0·32 to 0·99, p=0·0459). Serious adverse events did not differ between treatment groups, with the most common immediate complications being systolic arterial hypotension (70 [49%] patients in the non-invasive ventilation group vs 86 [50%] patients in the high-flow oxygen group) and chest infiltrate on x-ray (28 [20%] vs 33 [19%]), and the most common late complications being death at day 28 (53 [37%] vs 58 [34%]) and ventilator-associated pneumonia during ICU stay (31 [22%] vs 35 [20%]). Interpretation: In patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure, preoxygenation with non-invasive ventilation or high-flow oxygen therapy did not change the risk of severe hypoxaemia. Future research should explore the effect of preoxygenation method in patients with moderate-to-severe hypoxaemia at baseline. Funding: French Ministry of Health.
Analysis of combined non-invasive respiratory support in the first six waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Outcome according to the first respiratory support

Andrés Carrillo-Alcaraz,Miguel Guia,Laura Lopez-Gomez,Pablo Bayoumy,Nuria Alonso-Fernández,Maria Elena Martínez-Quintana,Aurea Higon-Cañigral,Ana Renedo-Villarroya,Juan Miguel Sánchez-Nieto,Maria Dolores Del Baño

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tacc.2022.101208

Abstract:Introduction: COVID-19 can lead to acute respiratory failure (ARF) requiring admission to intensive care unit (ICU). This study analyzes COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU, according to the initial respiratory support. Its main aim is to determine if the use of combination therapy: high-flow oxygen system with nasal cannula (HFNC) and non-invasive ventilation (NIV), is effective and safe in the treatment of these patients. Methods: Retrospective observational study with a prospective database. All COVID-19 patients, admitted to the ICU, between March 11, 2020, and February 12, 2022, and who required HFNC, NIV, or endotracheal intubation with invasive mechanical ventilation (ETI-IMV) were analyzed. HFNC failure was defined as therapeutic escalation to NIV, and NIV failure as the need for ETI-IMV or death in the ICU. The management of patients with non-invasive respiratory support included the use of combined therapy with different devices. The study period included the first six waves of the pandemic in Spain. Results: 424 patients were analyzed, of whom 12 (2.8%) received HFNC, 397 (93.7%) NIV and 15 (3.5%) ETI-IMV as first respiratory support. PaO2/FiO2 was 145 ± 30, 119 ± 26 and 117 ± 29 mmHg, respectively (p = 0.003). HFNC failed in 11 patients (91.7%), who then received NIV. Of the 408 patients treated with NIV, 353 (86.5%) received combination therapy with HFNC. In patients treated with NIV, there were 114 failures (27.9%). Only the value of SAPS II index (p = 0.001) and PaO2/FiO2 (p < 0.001) differed between the six analyzed waves, being the most altered values in the 3rd and 6th waves. Hospital mortality was 18.7%, not differing between the different waves (p = 0.713). Conclusions: Severe COVID-19 ARF can be effectively and safely treated with NIV combined with HFNC. The clinical characteristics of the patients did not change between the different waves, only showing a slight increase in severity in the 3rd and 6th waves, with no difference in the outcome.
[Effect of beta radiation on the regeneration of interrupted corneal nerves. I. Vital staining with methylene blue (author's transl)].

M. Šimková

1974-02-01

Abstract:
High-flow nasal cannula oxygen versus noninvasive ventilation for the management of acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema: a randomized controlled pilot study

Nicolas Marjanovic,Melyne Piton,Jennifer Lamarre,Camille Alleyrat,Raphael Couvreur,Jérémy Guenezan,Olivier Mimoz,Jean-Pierre Frat

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/mej.0000000000001128

2024-02-16

European Journal of Emergency Medicine

Abstract:Background Whether high-flow nasal oxygen can improve clinical signs of acute respiratory failure in acute heart failure (AHF) is uncertain. Objective To compare the effect of high-flow oxygen with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) on respiratory rate in patients admitted to an emergency department (ED) for AHF-related acute respiratory failure. Design, settings and participants Multicenter, randomized pilot study in three French EDs. Adult patients with acute respiratory failure due to suspected AHF were included. Key exclusion criteria were urgent need for intubation, Glasgow Coma Scale <13 points or hemodynamic instability. Intervention Patients were randomly assigned to receive high-flow oxygen (minimum 50 l/min) or noninvasive bilevel positive pressure ventilation. Outcomes measure The primary outcome was change in respiratory rate within the first hour of treatment and was analyzed with a linear mixed model. Secondary outcomes included changes in pulse oximetry, heart rate, blood pressure, blood gas samples, comfort, treatment failure and mortality. Main results Among the 145 eligible patients in the three participating centers, 60 patients were included in the analysis [median age 86 (interquartile range (IQR), 90; 92) years]. There was a median respiratory rate of 30.5 (IQR, 28; 33) and 29.5 (IQR, 27; 35) breaths/min in the high-flow oxygen and NIV groups respectively, with a median change of −10 (IQR, −12; −8) with high-flow nasal oxygen and −7 (IQR, −11; −5) breaths/min with NIV [estimated difference −2.6 breaths/min (95% confidence interval (CI), −0.5–5.7), P = 0.052] at 60 min. There was a median SpO 2 of 95 (IQR, 92; 97) and 96 (IQR, 93; 97) in the high-flow oxygen and NIV groups respectively, with a median change at 60 min of 2 (IQR, 0; 5) with high-flow nasal oxygen and 2 (IQR, −1; 5) % with NIV [estimated difference 0.8% (95% CI, −1.1–2.8), P = 0.60]. PaO 2 , PaCO 2 and pH did not differ at 1 h between groups, nor did treatment failure, intubation and mortality rates. Conclusion In this pilot study, we did not observe a statistically significant difference in changes in respiratory rate among patients with acute respiratory failure due to AHF and managed with high-flow oxygen or NIV. However, the point estimate and its large confidence interval may suggest a benefit of high-flow oxygen. Trial registration NCT04971213 (https://clinicaltrials.gov).

emergency medicine
Performance of Noninvasive Ventilation Masks in a Lung Model of COPD Exacerbation

Bruno Rocha de Macedo,Francinni Mambrini Pires Rego,Fabia Diniz Silva,Juliana Valerio Pinaffi,Juliana Carvalho Ferreira

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4187/respcare.06746

Abstract:Background: Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) reduces intubation and mortality in patients with COPD exacerbation who present with respiratory failure, and the type of mask may affect its success. Our objective was to compare the performance of 3 different NIV masks in a lung model. Methods: We set the lung simulator mechanics and respiratory rate, and tested a small oronasal mask, a total face mask, and a large oronasal mask. We added CO2 at a constant rate into the system and monitored the end-tidal carbon dioxide. We used a mechanical ventilator to deliver NIV in 8 different combinations of inspiratory effort, pressure support, and expiratory positive airway pressure. We measured end-tidal carbon dioxide mask leakage, tidal volume, trigger time, time to achieve 90% of the inspiratory target during inspiration, and excess inspiratory time. Results: We presented the mean ± SD of the 8 simulated conditions for each mask. The mean ± SD leakage was higher for the total face mask (51 ± 6 L/min) than for the small oronasal mask (37 ± 5 L/min) and for the large oronasal mask (21 ± 3 L/min), P < .001; but end-tidal carbon dioxide and tidal volume were similar. The mean ± SD 90% of the inspiratory target during inspiration was faster for the small oronasal mask (585 ± 49 ms) compared with the large oronasal (647 ± 107 ms) and total face mask (851 ± 105 ms), P < .001, all other variables were similar. Conclusions: In this model, we found that the type of mask had no impact on CO2 washout or on most synchrony variables.
Detailed Analysis of Primary Non-invasive Respiratory Support and Outcomes of Subjects With COVID-19 Acute Hypoxaemic Respiratory Failure

James Booker,Rebecca Egglestone,Jack Lushington,Maria Burova,Laura Hamilton,Elsie Hunter,Clare Morden,Darshni Pandya,Ryan Beecham,Robert MacKay,Sanjay Gupta,Michael P Grocott,Ahilanandan Dushianthan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.32362

2022-12-09

Cureus

Abstract:Background The role of non-invasive (continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or Non-invasive ventilation (NIV)) respiratory support (NIRS) as a primary oxygenation strategy for COVID-19 patients with acute severe hypoxic respiratory failure (AHRF), as opposed to invasive mechanical ventilation (invasive-MV), is uncertain. While NIRS may prevent complications related to invasive MV, prolonged NIRS and delays in intubation may lead to adverse outcomes. This study was conducted to assess the role of NIRS in COVID-19 hypoxemic respiratory failure and to explore the variables associated with NRIS failure. Methods This is a single-center, observational study of two distinct waves of severe COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU. Patients initially managed with non-invasive respiratory support with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 in acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure were included. Demographics, comorbidities, admission laboratory variables, and ICU admission scores were extracted from electronic health records. Univariate and multiple logistic regression was used to identify predictive factors for invasive mechanical ventilation. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were used to summarise survival between the ventilatory and time-to-intubation groups. Results There were 291 patients, of which 232 were managed with NIRS as an initial ventilation strategy. There was a high incidence of failure (48.7%). Admission APACHE II score, SOFA score, HACOR score, ROX index, and PaO2/FiO2 were all predictive of NIRS failure. Daily (days 1-4) HACOR scores and ROX index measurements highly predicted NIRS failure. Late NIRS failure (>24 hours) was independently associated with increased mortality (44%). Conclusion NIRS is effective as first-line therapy for COVID-19 patients with AHRF. However, failure, particularly delayed failure, is associated with significant mortality. Early prediction of NIRS failure may prevent adverse outcomes.
Efficiency of continuous positive airway pressure and high-flow nasal oxygen therapy in critically ill patients with COVID-19

Corina Manole,Mihaela Dediu-Anghel,Liliana Baroiu,Ioana Anca Ștefanopol,Alexandru Nechifor,Elena Niculet,Raul Mihailov,Lavinia Alexandra Moroianu,Doina Carina Voinescu,Dorel Firescu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/03000605231222151

2024-01-11

Journal of International Medical Research

Abstract:Journal of International Medical Research, Volume 52, Issue 1, January 2024. ObjectiveCritically ill patients with COVID-19 develop acute respiratory distress syndrome characterized by relatively well-preserved pulmonary compliance but severe hypoxemia. The challenge in managing such patients lies in optimizing oxygenation, which can be achieved through either high oxygen flow or noninvasive mechanical ventilation. This study was performed to compare the efficiency of two methods of noninvasive oxygen therapy: continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (HFNO).MethodsThis retrospective cohort study involved 668 patients hospitalized in the intensive care unit (ICU) of the "Sf. Apostol Andrei" Emergency Clinical Hospital, Galati, Romania from 1 April 2020 to 31 March 2021 (CPAP, n = 108; HFNO, n = 108).ResultsMortality was significantly lower in the CPAP and HFNO groups than in the group of patients who underwent intubation and mechanical ventilation after ICU admission. Mortality in the ICU was not significantly different between the CPAP and HFNO groups.ConclusionsHFNO and CPAP represent efficient alternative therapies for patients with severe COVID-19 whose respiratory treatment has failed. Studies involving larger groups of patients are necessary to establish a personalized, more complex management modality for critically ill patients with COVID-19.

pharmacology & pharmacy,medicine, research & experimental

[Exertion heat stroke and acute liver insufficiency].

Effectiveness of an adapted diving mask (Owner mask) for non-invasive ventilation in the COVID-19 pandemic scenario: study protocol for a randomized clinical trial

Benefits and risks of noninvasive oxygenation strategy in COVID-19: a multicenter, prospective cohort study (COVID-ICU) in 137 hospitals

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

Effect of Noninvasive Respiratory Strategies on Intubation or Mortality Among Patients With Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure and COVID-19: The RECOVERY-RS Randomized Clinical Trial

Addition of Mask to High-flow Nasal Oxygen: A Strategy to Improve Oxygenation in Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure Secondary to COVID-19

Comparison of High Flow Nasal Cannula and Continuous Positive Airway Pressure in COVID-19 Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Critical Care Unit: A Randomized Control Study

The Use of High-Flow Nasal Cannula in the Emergency Department and a Comparison of Its Efficacy With Noninvasive Ventilation

Role of Non-Invasive Respiratory Supports in COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Failure Patients with Do Not Intubate Orders

The effects of a 2-h trial of high-flow oxygen by nasal cannula versus Venturi mask in immunocompromised patients with hypoxemic acute respiratory failure: a multicenter randomized trial

Combining reservoir mask oxygenation with high-flow nasal cannula in the treatment of hypoxemic respiratory failure among patients with COVID-19 pneumonia: a retrospective cohort study

The development ofAmblyomma americanum andDermacentor variabilis (Acari: Ixodidae) fed on rabbits immunized with tick hemolymph

Breathing pattern, accessory respiratory muscles work, and gas exchange evaluation for prediction of NIV failure in moderate-to-severe COVID-19-associated ARDS after deterioration of respiratory failure outside ICU: the COVID-NIV observational study

Noninvasive ventilation in patients with COVID-19 from the perspective of the risk of contamination: a narrative review

Non-invasive ventilation versus high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy with apnoeic oxygenation for preoxygenation before intubation of patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure: a randomised, multicentre, open-label trial

Analysis of combined non-invasive respiratory support in the first six waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Outcome according to the first respiratory support

[Effect of beta radiation on the regeneration of interrupted corneal nerves. I. Vital staining with methylene blue (author's transl)].

High-flow nasal cannula oxygen versus noninvasive ventilation for the management of acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema: a randomized controlled pilot study

Performance of Noninvasive Ventilation Masks in a Lung Model of COPD Exacerbation

Detailed Analysis of Primary Non-invasive Respiratory Support and Outcomes of Subjects With COVID-19 Acute Hypoxaemic Respiratory Failure

Efficiency of continuous positive airway pressure and high-flow nasal oxygen therapy in critically ill patients with COVID-19