Effect of high-flow nasal cannula versus non-invasive ventilation in preventing re-intubation in high-risk chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients: A randomised controlled trial
Background: Currently, a high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has been shown to improve extubation outcomes. However, there is a lack of evidence on the utilisation of HFNC in high-risk chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of HFNC versus non...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2023-01-01
|
| Series: | Lung India |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.lungindia.com/article.asp?issn=0970-2113;year=2023;volume=40;issue=4;spage=312;epage=320;aulast=Magdy |
| Summary: | Background: Currently, a high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has been shown to improve extubation outcomes. However, there is a lack of evidence on the utilisation of HFNC in high-risk chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of HFNC versus non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in preventing re-intubation following planned extubation in high-risk COPD patients. Patients and Methods: In this prospective, randomised, controlled trial, 230 mechanically ventilated COPD patients at high risk for re-intubation who fulfilled the criteria for planned extubation were enrolled. Post-extubation blood gases and vital signs at 1, 24, and 48 hours were recorded. The primary outcome was the re-intubation rate within 72 hours. Secondary outcomes included post-extubation respiratory failure, respiratory infection, intensive care unit and hospital length of stay, and mortality rate at 60 days. Results: 230 patients after planned extubation were randomly allocated to receive either HFNC (n = 120) or NIV (n = 110). Re-intubation within 72 hours was significantly lower in the high-flow group: 8 patients (6.6%) versus 23 patients (20.9%) in the NIV group {absolute difference, 14.3% [95% confidence interval (CI), 10.9–16.3]; P = 0.001}. The frequency of post-extubation respiratory failure was less in patients assigned to HFNC than in those allocated NIV (25% vs. 35.4%) [absolute difference, 10.4% (95% CI, 2.4–14.3); P = 0.001]. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding reasons for respiratory failure after extubation. It was observed that the 60-day mortality rate was lower in patients who received HFNC than in those assigned to NIV (5% vs. 13.6%) [absolute difference, 8.6 (95% CI, 4.3 to 9.10); P = 0.001]. Conclusion: The use of HFNC after extubation appears to be superior to NIV in reducing the risk of re-intubation within 72 hours and 60-day mortality in high-risk COPD patients. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0970-2113 0974-598X |