-
Review Meta Analysis
High-flow nasal cannula in adults with acute respiratory failure and after extubation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
- Zhiheng Xu, Yimin Li, Jianmeng Zhou, Xi Li, Yongbo Huang, Xiaoqing Liu, Burns Karen E A KEA Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. BurnsK@smh.ca. , Nanshan Zhong, and Haibo Zhang.
- State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Diseases, National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute for Respiratory Health, Guangzhou, China.
- Resp Res. 2018 Oct 16; 19 (1): 202.
BackgroundHigh-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) can be used as an initial support strategy for patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF) and after extubation. However, no clear evidence exists to support or oppose HFNC use in clinical practice. We summarized the effects of HFNC, compared to conventional oxygen therapy (COT) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV), on important outcomes including treatment failure and intubation/reintubation rates in adult patients with ARF and after extubation.MethodsWe searched 4 electronic databases (Pubmed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science) to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of HFNC with either COT or NIV on rates of 1) treatment failure and 2) intubation/reintubation in adult critically ill patients.ResultsWe identified 18 RCTs (n = 4251 patients) in pooled analyses. As a primary mode of support, HFNC treatment reduced the risk of treatment failure [Odds Ratio (OR) 0.65; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43-0.98; p = 0.04; I2 = 32%] but had no effect on preventing intubation (OR, 0.74; 95%CI 0.45-1.21; p = 0.23; I2 = 0%) compared to COT. When used after extubation, HFNC (vs. COT) treatment significantly decreased reintubation rate (OR 0.46; 95%CI 0.33-0.63; p < 0.00001; I2 = 30%) and extubation failure (OR 0.43; 95%CI 0.25-0.73; p = 0.002; I2 = 66%). Compared to NIV, HFNC significantly reduced intubation rate (OR 0.57; 95%CI 0.36-0.92; p = 0.02; I2 = 0%) when used as initial support, but did no favorably impact clinical outcomes post extubation in few trials.ConclusionsHFNC was superior to COT in reducing treatment failure when used as a primary support strategy and in reducing rates of extubation failure and reintubation when used after extubation. In few trials, HFNC reduced intubation rate compared to NIV when used as initial support but demonstrated no beneficial effects after extubation.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.