Dataset Information

High-flow Nasal Cannulae Versus Non-invasive Ventilation for Preoxygenation of Obese Patients: The PREOPTIPOP Randomized Trial.

ABSTRACT: Background:In obese patients, preoxygenation with non-invasive ventilation (NIV) was reported to improve outcomes compared with facemask. In this setting, high-flow nasal cannulae (HFNC) used before and during intubation has never been studied against NIV. Methods:The PREOPTIPOP study is a randomised, single-centre, open-labelled, controlled trial including obese patients requiring intubation before scheduled surgery. Patients were randomised to receive preoxygenation by HFNC or NIV. HFNC was maintained throughout intubation whereas NIV was removed when apnea occurred to perform laryngoscopy. The study was designed to assess the superiority of HNFC. The primary outcome was the lowest level of end-tidal oxygen concentration (EtO2) within 2?min after intubation. Secondary outcomes included drop in pulse oximetry and complications related to intubation. Main findings:A total of 100 patients were randomised. The intent-to-treat analysis found median [IQR] lowest EtO2 of 76% [66-82] for HFNC and 88% [82-90] for NIV (mean difference?-?12·1 [- 15·1 to - 8·5], p?

SUBMITTER: Vourc'h M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6737343 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

High-flow Nasal Cannulae Versus Non-invasive Ventilation for Preoxygenation of Obese Patients: The PREOPTIPOP Randomized Trial.

Vourc'h Mickael M Baud Gabrielle G Feuillet Fanny F Blanchard Claire C Mirallie Eric E Guitton Christophe C Jaber Samir S Asehnoune Karim K

EClinicalMedicine 20190605

<h4>Background</h4>In obese patients, preoxygenation with non-invasive ventilation (NIV) was reported to improve outcomes compared with facemask. In this setting, high-flow nasal cannulae (HFNC) used before and during intubation has never been studied against NIV.<h4>Methods</h4>The PREOPTIPOP study is a randomised, single-centre, open-labelled, controlled trial including obese patients requiring intubation before scheduled surgery. Patients were randomised to receive preoxygenation by HFNC or N ...[more]

PMID: 31528849

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy is being increasingly used to prevent post-extubation hypoxemic respiratory failure and reintubation. However, evidence to support the use of HFNC in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with hypercapnic respiratory failure after extubation is limited. This study was conducted to test if HFNC is non-inferior to non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in preventing post-extubation treatment failure in COPD patients previously intubated for hypercapnic respiratory failure. METHODS:COPD patients with hypercapnic respiratory failure who were already receiving invasive ventilation were randomized to HFNC or NIV at extubation at two large tertiary academic teaching hospitals. The primary endpoint was treatment failure, defined as either resumption of invasive ventilation or switching to the other study treatment modality (NIV for patients in the NFNC group or vice versa). RESULTS:Ninety-six patients were randomly assigned to the HFNC group or NIV group. After secondary exclusion, 44 patients in the HFNC group and 42 patients in the NIV group were included in the analysis. The treatment failure rate in the HFNC group was 22.7% and 28.6% in the NIV group-risk difference of -?5.8% (95% CI, -?23.8-12.4%, p?=?0.535), which was significantly lower than the non-inferior margin of 9%. Analysis of the causes of treatment failure showed that treatment intolerance in the HFNC group was significantly lower than that in the NIV group, with a risk difference of -?50.0% (95% CI, -?74.6 to -?12.9%, p?=?0.015). One hour after extubation, the mean respiratory rates of both groups were faster than their baseline levels before extubation (p?<?0.050). Twenty-four hours after extubation, the respiratory rate of the HFNC group had returned to baseline, but the NIV group was still higher than the baseline. Forty-eight hours after extubation, the respiratory rates of both groups were not significantly different from the baseline. The average number of daily airway care interventions in the NIV group was 7 (5-9.3), which was significantly higher than 6 (4-7) times in the HFNC group (p?=?0.006). The comfort score and incidence of nasal and facial skin breakdown of the HFNC group was also significantly better than that of the NIV group [7 (6-8) vs 5 (4-7), P?<?0.001] and [0 vs 9.6%, p?=?0.027], respectively. CONCLUSION:Among COPD patients with severe hypercapnic respiratory failure who received invasive ventilation, the use of HFNC after extubation did not result in increased rates of treatment failure compared with NIV. HFNC also had better tolerance and comfort than NIV. TRIAL REGISTRATION:chictr.org ( ChiCTR1800018530 ). Registered on 22 September 2018, http://www.chictr.org.cn/usercenter.aspx.

Project description:BackgroundIn intensive care units (ICUs), patients experiencing post-extubation respiratory failure have poor outcomes. The use of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) to treat post-extubation respiratory failure may increase the risk of death. This study aims at comparing mortality between patients treated with NIV alternating with high-flow nasal oxygen or high-flow nasal oxygen alone.MethodsPost-hoc analysis of a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial focusing on patients who experienced post-extubation respiratory failure within the 7 days following extubation. Patients were classified in the NIV group or the high-flow nasal oxygen group according to oxygenation strategy used after the onset of post-extubation respiratory failure. Patients reintubated within the first hour after extubation and those promptly reintubated without prior treatment were excluded. The primary outcome was mortality at day 28 after the onset of post-extubation respiratory failure.ResultsAmong 651 extubated patients, 158 (25%) experienced respiratory failure and 146 were included in the analysis. Mortality at day 28 was 18% (15/84) using NIV alternating with high-flow nasal oxygen and 29% (18/62) with high flow nasal oxygen alone (difference, - 11% [95% CI, - 25 to 2]; p = 0.12). Among the 46 patients with hypercapnia at the onset of respiratory failure, mortality at day 28 was 3% (1/33) with NIV and 31% (4/13) with high-flow nasal oxygen alone (difference, - 28% [95% CI, - 54 to - 6]; p = 0.006). The proportion of patients reintubated 48 h after the onset of post-extubation respiratory failure was 44% (37/84) with NIV and 52% (32/62) with high-flow nasal oxygen alone (p = 0.21).ConclusionsIn patients with post-extubation respiratory failure, NIV alternating with high-flow nasal oxygen might not increase the risk of death. Trial registration number The trial was registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov with the registration number NCT03121482 the 20th April 2017.

Project description:Many intensive care unit patients who undergo endotracheal extubation experience extubation failure and require reintubation. Because of the high mortality rate associated with reintubation, postextubation respiratory management is crucial, especially for high-risk populations. We conducted the present study to compare the effectiveness of oxygen therapy administered using high-flow nasal cannulae (HFNC) and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) in preventing reintubation among patients receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation (PMV). This single-center, prospective, unblinded randomized controlled trial was at the respiratory care center (RCC). Participants were randomized to an HFNC group or an NIPPV group (20 patients in each) and received noninvasive respiratory support (NRS) administered using their assigned method. The primary outcome was reintubation within7 days after extubation. None of the patients in the NIPPV group required reintubation, whereas 5 (25%) of the patients in the HFNC group required reintubation (P = 0.047). The 90-day mortality rates of the NIPPV and HFNC groups (four patients [20%] vs. two patients [10%], respectively) did not differ significantly. No significant differences in length of RCC stay, length of hospital stay, time to liberation from NRS, and ventilator-free days at 28-day were identified. The time to event outcome analysis also revealed that the risk of reintubation in the HFNC group was higher than that in the NIPPV group (P = 0.018). Although HFNC is becoming increasingly common as a form of postextubation NRS, HFNC may not be as effective as NIPPV in preventing reintubation among patients who have been receiving PMV for at least 2 weeks. Additional studies evaluating HFNC as an alternative to NIPPV for patients receiving PMV are warranted.ClinicalTrial.gov ID: NCT04564859; IRB number: 20160901R.Trial registration: ClinicalTrial.gov ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04564859 ).

Project description:Background and objectivesPreoxygenation is crucial for providing sufficient oxygen reservoir to a patient before intubation and enables the extension of the period between breathing termination and critical desaturation (safe apnoea time). Conventionally, face mask ventilation is used for preoxygenation. Non-invasive ventilation is a new preoxygenation method. The study objective was to compare the outcomes of non-invasive ventilation and face mask ventilation for preoxygenation.MethodPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and the ClinicalTrials.gov registry were searched for eligible studies published from database inception to September 2021. Individual effect sizes were standardized, and a meta-analysis was conducted using random effects models to calculate the pooled effect size. Inclusion criteria were randomised controlled trials of comparing the outcomes of non-invasive ventilation or face mask ventilation for preoxygenation in patients scheduled for surgeries. The primary outcome was safe apnea time, and the secondary outcomes were post-operative complications, number of patients who achieved the expired O2 fraction (FeO2) after 3 min of preoxygenation, minimal SpO2 during tracheal intubation, partial pressure of oxygen in the arterial blood (PaO2) and partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2) after preoxygenation, and PaO2 and PaCO2 after tracheal intubation.Results13 trials were eligible for inclusion in this study. Significant differences were observed in safe apnoea time, number of patients who achieved FeO2 90% after preoxygenation for 3 min, and PaO2 and PaCO2 after preoxygenation and tracheal intubation. Only in the non-obese subgroup, no significant difference was observed in safe apnoea time (mean difference: 125.38, 95% confidence interval: - 12.26 to 263.03).ConclusionNon-invasive ventilation appeared to be more effective than conventional methods for preoxygenation. We recommend non-invasive ventilation based on our results.

Project description:BackgroundMechanical ventilation is commonly used for managing respiratory failure in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients, but weaning patients off ventilator support can be challenging and associated with complications. While many patients respond well to Non-invasive ventilation (NIV), a significant proportion may not respond as favourably. We aimed to assess whether high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is equally effective as NIV in reducing extubation failure among previously intubated COPD patients.MethodsThis systematic review was carried out in line with PRISMA guidelines We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane library from inception until February 15, 2023. Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) of adults at high risk for extubating failure were included. We examined the use of HFNC as the intervention and NIV as the comparator. Our outcome of interest included, reintubation rate, length of hospital or intensive care unit (ICU) stay, adverse events, and time to reintubation. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used for randomized trials to assess risk of bias.ResultsWe identified 348 citations, 11 of which were included, representing 2,666 patients. The trials indicate that HFNC is comparable to NIV in preventing reintubation after extubating in COPD patients. In comparison to NIV, HFNC also produced improved tolerance, comfort, and less complications such as airway care interventions. NIV with active humification may be more effective that HFNC in avoiding reintubation in patients who are at extremely high risk for extubating failure.ConclusionThe inconclusive nature of emerging evidence highlights the need for additional studies to establish the efficacy and suitability of HFNC as an alternative to NIV for previously intubated COPD patients. Clinicians should consider the available options and individualize their approach based on patient characteristics. Future research should focus on addressing these gaps in knowledge to guide clinical decision-making and optimize outcomes for this patient population.

Dataset Information

High-flow Nasal Cannulae Versus Non-invasive Ventilation for Preoxygenation of Obese Patients: The PREOPTIPOP Randomized Trial.

Publications

High-flow Nasal Cannulae Versus Non-invasive Ventilation for Preoxygenation of Obese Patients: The PREOPTIPOP Randomized Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets