Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

High flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy versus non-invasive ventilation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with acute-moderate hypercapnic respiratory failure: an observational cohort study.
Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2019; 14:1229-1237.IJ

Abstract

Background

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy in acute hypoxic respiratory failure is becoming increasingly popular. However, evidence to support the use of HFNC in acute respiratory failure (ARF) with hypercapnia is limited.

Methods

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with moderate hypercapnic ARF (arterial blood gas pH 7.25-7.35, PaCO2>50 mmHg) who received HFNC or non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in the intensive care uint from April 2016 to March 2018 were analyzed retrospectively. The endpoint was treatment failure, defined as either invasive ventilation, or a switch to the other study treatment (NIV for patients in the NFNC group, and vice-versa), and 28-day mortality.

Results

Eighty-two COPD patients (39 in the HFNC group and 43 in the NIV group) were enrolled in this study. The mean age was 71.8±8.2 and 54 patients (65.9%) were male. The treatment failed in 11 out of 39 patients with HFNC (28.2%) and in 17 of 43 patients with NIV (39.5%) (P=0.268). No significant differences were found for 28-day mortality (15.4% in the HFNC group and 14% in the NIV group, P=0.824). During the first 24 hrs of treatment, the number of nursing airway care interventions in the HFNC group was significantly less than in the NIV group, while the duration of device application was significantly longer in the HFNC group (all P<0.05). Skin breakdown was significantly more common in the NIV group (20.9% vs 5.1%, P<0.05).

Conclusion

Among COPD patients with moderate hypercarbic ARF, the use of HFNC compared with NIV did not result in increased rates of treatment failure, while there were fewer nursing interventions and skin breakdown episodes reported in the HFNC group.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Emergency, Clinical Medical College, Yangzhou University, Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital, Yangzhou, People's Republic of China.Department of Emergency, Clinical Medical College, Yangzhou University, Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital, Yangzhou, People's Republic of China.Department of Emergency, Clinical Medical College, Yangzhou University, Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital, Yangzhou, People's Republic of China.Department of Emergency, Clinical Medical College, Yangzhou University, Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital, Yangzhou, People's Republic of China.Department of Emergency, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, People's Republic of China.Department of Emergency, Clinical Medical College, Yangzhou University, Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital, Yangzhou, People's Republic of China.Department of Emergency, Clinical Medical College, Yangzhou University, Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital, Yangzhou, People's Republic of China.Department of Emergency, The First Affiliated Hospital, and College of Clinical Medicine of Henan University of Science and Technology, Luoyang, People's Republic of China.

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article
Observational Study

Language

eng

PubMed ID

31239658

Citation

Sun, Jiayan, et al. "High Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen Therapy Versus Non-invasive Ventilation for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease With Acute-moderate Hypercapnic Respiratory Failure: an Observational Cohort Study." International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, vol. 14, 2019, pp. 1229-1237.
Sun J, Li Y, Ling B, et al. High flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy versus non-invasive ventilation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with acute-moderate hypercapnic respiratory failure: an observational cohort study. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2019;14:1229-1237.
Sun, J., Li, Y., Ling, B., Zhu, Q., Hu, Y., Tan, D., Geng, P., & Xu, J. (2019). High flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy versus non-invasive ventilation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with acute-moderate hypercapnic respiratory failure: an observational cohort study. International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, 14, 1229-1237. https://doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S206567
Sun J, et al. High Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen Therapy Versus Non-invasive Ventilation for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease With Acute-moderate Hypercapnic Respiratory Failure: an Observational Cohort Study. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2019;14:1229-1237. PubMed PMID: 31239658.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - High flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy versus non-invasive ventilation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with acute-moderate hypercapnic respiratory failure: an observational cohort study. AU - Sun,Jiayan, AU - Li,Yujie, AU - Ling,Bingyu, AU - Zhu,Qingcheng, AU - Hu,Yingying, AU - Tan,Dingyu, AU - Geng,Ping, AU - Xu,Jun, Y1 - 2019/06/05/ PY - 2019/02/23/received PY - 2019/05/21/accepted PY - 2019/6/27/entrez PY - 2019/6/27/pubmed PY - 2020/1/7/medline KW - chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases KW - cohort study KW - high-flow nasal cannula KW - non-invasive ventilation KW - respiratory failure SP - 1229 EP - 1237 JF - International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease JO - Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis VL - 14 N2 - Background: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy in acute hypoxic respiratory failure is becoming increasingly popular. However, evidence to support the use of HFNC in acute respiratory failure (ARF) with hypercapnia is limited. Methods: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with moderate hypercapnic ARF (arterial blood gas pH 7.25-7.35, PaCO2>50 mmHg) who received HFNC or non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in the intensive care uint from April 2016 to March 2018 were analyzed retrospectively. The endpoint was treatment failure, defined as either invasive ventilation, or a switch to the other study treatment (NIV for patients in the NFNC group, and vice-versa), and 28-day mortality. Results: Eighty-two COPD patients (39 in the HFNC group and 43 in the NIV group) were enrolled in this study. The mean age was 71.8±8.2 and 54 patients (65.9%) were male. The treatment failed in 11 out of 39 patients with HFNC (28.2%) and in 17 of 43 patients with NIV (39.5%) (P=0.268). No significant differences were found for 28-day mortality (15.4% in the HFNC group and 14% in the NIV group, P=0.824). During the first 24 hrs of treatment, the number of nursing airway care interventions in the HFNC group was significantly less than in the NIV group, while the duration of device application was significantly longer in the HFNC group (all P<0.05). Skin breakdown was significantly more common in the NIV group (20.9% vs 5.1%, P<0.05). Conclusion: Among COPD patients with moderate hypercarbic ARF, the use of HFNC compared with NIV did not result in increased rates of treatment failure, while there were fewer nursing interventions and skin breakdown episodes reported in the HFNC group. SN - 1178-2005 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/31239658/High_flow_nasal_cannula_oxygen_therapy_versus_non_invasive_ventilation_for_chronic_obstructive_pulmonary_disease_with_acute_moderate_hypercapnic_respiratory_failure:_an_observational_cohort_study_ L2 - https://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S206567 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -