Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Physiological Comparison of High-Flow Nasal Cannula and Helmet Noninvasive Ventilation in Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2020 Feb 01; 201(3):303-312.AJ

Abstract

Rationale: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and helmet noninvasive ventilation (NIV) are used for the management of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.Objectives: Physiological comparison of HFNC and helmet NIV in patients with hypoxemia.Methods: Fifteen patients with hypoxemia with PaO2/FiO2 < 200 mm Hg received helmet NIV (positive end-expiratory pressure ≥ 10 cm H2O, pressure support = 10-15 cm H2O) and HFNC (50 L/min) in randomized crossover order. Arterial blood gases, dyspnea, and comfort were recorded. Inspiratory effort was estimated by esophageal pressure (Pes) swings. Pes-simplified pressure-time product and transpulmonary pressure swings were measured.Measurements and Main Results: As compared with HFNC, helmet NIV increased PaO2/FiO2 (median [interquartile range]: 255 mm Hg [140-299] vs. 138 [101-172]; P = 0.001) and lowered inspiratory effort (7 cm H2O [4-11] vs. 15 [8-19]; P = 0.001) in all patients. Inspiratory effort reduction by NIV was linearly related to inspiratory effort during HFNC (r = 0.84; P < 0.001). Helmet NIV reduced respiratory rate (24 breaths/min [23-31] vs. 29 [26-32]; P = 0.027), Pes-simplified pressure-time product (93 cm H2O ⋅ s ⋅ min-1 [43-138] vs. 200 [168-335]; P = 0.001), and dyspnea (visual analog scale 3 [2-5] vs. 8 [6-9]; P = 0.002), without affecting PaCO2 (P = 0.80) and comfort (P = 0.50). In the overall cohort, transpulmonary pressure swings were not different between treatments (NIV = 18 cm H2O [14-21] vs. HFNC = 15 [8-19]; P = 0.11), but patients exhibiting lower inspiratory effort on HFNC experienced increases in transpulmonary pressure swings with helmet NIV. Higher transpulmonary pressure swings during NIV were associated with subsequent need for intubation.Conclusions: As compared with HFNC in hypoxemic respiratory failure, helmet NIV improves oxygenation, reduces dyspnea, inspiratory effort, and simplified pressure-time product, with similar transpulmonary pressure swings, PaCO2, and comfort.

Links

Publisher Full Text (DOI)

Authors+Show Affiliations

Grieco DL
Dipartimento di Scienze dell'Emergenza, Anestesiologiche e della Rianimazione, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy; and.
Menga LS
Dipartimento di Scienze dell'Emergenza, Anestesiologiche e della Rianimazione, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy; and.
Raggi V
Dipartimento di Scienze dell'Emergenza, Anestesiologiche e della Rianimazione, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy; and.
Bongiovanni F
Dipartimento di Scienze dell'Emergenza, Anestesiologiche e della Rianimazione, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy; and.
Anzellotti GM
Dipartimento di Scienze dell'Emergenza, Anestesiologiche e della Rianimazione, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy; and.
Tanzarella ES
Dipartimento di Scienze dell'Emergenza, Anestesiologiche e della Rianimazione, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy; and.
Bocci MG
Dipartimento di Scienze dell'Emergenza, Anestesiologiche e della Rianimazione, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy; and.
Mercurio G
Dipartimento di Scienze dell'Emergenza, Anestesiologiche e della Rianimazione, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy; and.
Dell'Anna AM
Dipartimento di Scienze dell'Emergenza, Anestesiologiche e della Rianimazione, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy; and.
Eleuteri D
Dipartimento di Scienze dell'Emergenza, Anestesiologiche e della Rianimazione, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy; and.
Bello G
Dipartimento di Scienze dell'Emergenza, Anestesiologiche e della Rianimazione, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy; and.
Maviglia R
Dipartimento di Scienze dell'Emergenza, Anestesiologiche e della Rianimazione, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy; and.
Conti G
Dipartimento di Scienze dell'Emergenza, Anestesiologiche e della Rianimazione, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy; and.
Maggiore SM
Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Section of Anesthesia, Analgesia, Perioperative and Intensive Care, SS. Annunziata Hospital, Gabriele d'Annunzio University of Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy.
Antonelli M
Dipartimento di Scienze dell'Emergenza, Anestesiologiche e della Rianimazione, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy; and.

MeSH

Acute DiseaseAgedCannulaCross-Over StudiesFemaleHumansHypoxiaMaleMiddle AgedNoninvasive VentilationRespiratory Insufficiency

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Language

eng

PubMed ID

31687831

Clinical Trial Links

Physiological Effects of a New Interface on Lung Ventilation and Gas Distribution
Effects of a New Interface for NIV on Respiratory Drive

Citation

Grieco, Domenico Luca, et al. "Physiological Comparison of High-Flow Nasal Cannula and Helmet Noninvasive Ventilation in Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure." American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, vol. 201, no. 3, 2020, pp. 303-312.
Grieco DL, Menga LS, Raggi V, et al. Physiological Comparison of High-Flow Nasal Cannula and Helmet Noninvasive Ventilation in Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2020;201(3):303-312.
Grieco, D. L., Menga, L. S., Raggi, V., Bongiovanni, F., Anzellotti, G. M., Tanzarella, E. S., Bocci, M. G., Mercurio, G., Dell'Anna, A. M., Eleuteri, D., Bello, G., Maviglia, R., Conti, G., Maggiore, S. M., & Antonelli, M. (2020). Physiological Comparison of High-Flow Nasal Cannula and Helmet Noninvasive Ventilation in Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 201(3), 303-312. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201904-0841OC
Grieco DL, et al. Physiological Comparison of High-Flow Nasal Cannula and Helmet Noninvasive Ventilation in Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2020 Feb 1;201(3):303-312. PubMed PMID: 31687831.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Physiological Comparison of High-Flow Nasal Cannula and Helmet Noninvasive Ventilation in Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure. AU - Grieco,Domenico Luca, AU - Menga,Luca S, AU - Raggi,Valeria, AU - Bongiovanni,Filippo, AU - Anzellotti,Gian Marco, AU - Tanzarella,Eloisa S, AU - Bocci,Maria Grazia, AU - Mercurio,Giovanna, AU - Dell'Anna,Antonio M, AU - Eleuteri,Davide, AU - Bello,Giuseppe, AU - Maviglia,Riccardo, AU - Conti,Giorgio, AU - Maggiore,Salvatore Maurizio, AU - Antonelli,Massimo, PY - 2019/11/7/pubmed PY - 2020/5/7/medline PY - 2019/11/6/entrez KW - acute respiratory failure KW - high-flow nasal oxygen KW - noninvasive ventilation SP - 303 EP - 312 JF - American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine JO - Am J Respir Crit Care Med VL - 201 IS - 3 N2 - Rationale: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and helmet noninvasive ventilation (NIV) are used for the management of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.Objectives: Physiological comparison of HFNC and helmet NIV in patients with hypoxemia.Methods: Fifteen patients with hypoxemia with PaO2/FiO2 < 200 mm Hg received helmet NIV (positive end-expiratory pressure ≥ 10 cm H2O, pressure support = 10-15 cm H2O) and HFNC (50 L/min) in randomized crossover order. Arterial blood gases, dyspnea, and comfort were recorded. Inspiratory effort was estimated by esophageal pressure (Pes) swings. Pes-simplified pressure-time product and transpulmonary pressure swings were measured.Measurements and Main Results: As compared with HFNC, helmet NIV increased PaO2/FiO2 (median [interquartile range]: 255 mm Hg [140-299] vs. 138 [101-172]; P = 0.001) and lowered inspiratory effort (7 cm H2O [4-11] vs. 15 [8-19]; P = 0.001) in all patients. Inspiratory effort reduction by NIV was linearly related to inspiratory effort during HFNC (r = 0.84; P < 0.001). Helmet NIV reduced respiratory rate (24 breaths/min [23-31] vs. 29 [26-32]; P = 0.027), Pes-simplified pressure-time product (93 cm H2O ⋅ s ⋅ min-1 [43-138] vs. 200 [168-335]; P = 0.001), and dyspnea (visual analog scale 3 [2-5] vs. 8 [6-9]; P = 0.002), without affecting PaCO2 (P = 0.80) and comfort (P = 0.50). In the overall cohort, transpulmonary pressure swings were not different between treatments (NIV = 18 cm H2O [14-21] vs. HFNC = 15 [8-19]; P = 0.11), but patients exhibiting lower inspiratory effort on HFNC experienced increases in transpulmonary pressure swings with helmet NIV. Higher transpulmonary pressure swings during NIV were associated with subsequent need for intubation.Conclusions: As compared with HFNC in hypoxemic respiratory failure, helmet NIV improves oxygenation, reduces dyspnea, inspiratory effort, and simplified pressure-time product, with similar transpulmonary pressure swings, PaCO2, and comfort. SN - 1535-4970 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/31687831/Physiological_Comparison_of_High_Flow_Nasal_Cannula_and_Helmet_Noninvasive_Ventilation_in_Acute_Hypoxemic_Respiratory_Failure_ DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -