• Patharapan Lersritwimanmaen, Nuttapol Rittayamai, Jamsak Tscheikuna, and J BrochardLaurentLInterdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.Keenan Research Centre, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada..
• Division of Respiratory Diseases and Tuberculosis, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
• Respir Care. 2021 May 1; 66 (5): 806813806-813.

BackgroundHigh-flow oxygen therapy via tracheostomy (HFT) can be used in tracheostomized patients during ventilator disconnection. The physiologic effects of this technique are unknown. We hypothesized that HFT would reduce inspiratory effort and improve breathing pattern compared to conventional oxygen therapy via T-tube. This study aimed to evaluate the physiologic effects of HFT compared to conventional O2 in patients with prolonged mechanical ventilation.MethodsA randomized crossover physiologic study was conducted in adult tracheostomized patients who experienced temporary periods of ventilator disconnection. Subjects were ventilated with pressure support ventilation (PSV) for 15 min and were then randomly assigned to HFT or conventional O2 via T-tube for 30 min. After a washout period, subjects were switched to the other system. Esophageal pressure (Pes), breathing frequency, blood pressure, heart rate, [Formula: see text], and transcutaneously measured pressure of carbon dioxide ([Formula: see text]) were recorded. The primary outcome was inspiratory effort as determined by the simplified esophageal pressure-time product (sPTPes). Secondary outcomes were Pes swing, breathing frequency, heart rate, mean arterial pressure, [Formula: see text], and [Formula: see text] between groups.ResultsTwenty-two subjects were enrolled: sPTPes per minute was significantly higher with HFT and conventional O2 compared to PSV (153.5 ± 97.9, 163.5 ± 111.3, and 86.8 ± 51.1 cm H2O × s/min, respectively, P = .001), but it was not different between HFT and conventional O2 (P = .72). Breathing frequency increased significantly after switching from PSV to HFT and conventional O2 (23 ± 4 vs 26 ± 6 and 23 ± 4 vs 27 ± 5 breaths/min, respectively, P = .001). [Formula: see text] was higher with conventional O2 compared to HFT (P = .02). No differences in [Formula: see text], mean arterial pressure, or heart rate were observed between HFT and conventional O2.ConclusionsInspiratory effort and breathing frequency increased significantly during unassisted breathing compared to PSV in tracheostomized subjects, but HFT via tracheostomy provided no measurable additional physiologic benefit compared to O2 therapy via T-tube.Copyright © 2021 by Daedalus Enterprises.

13 keywords...

hide…