-
Intensive Care Medicine May 2019This systematic review and meta-analysis summarizes the safety and efficacy of high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
This systematic review and meta-analysis summarizes the safety and efficacy of high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.
METHODS
We performed a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science. We identified randomized controlled trials that compared HFNC to conventional oxygen therapy. We pooled data and report summary estimates of effect using relative risk for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference or standardized mean difference for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals. We assessed risk of bias of included studies using the Cochrane tool and certainty in pooled effect estimates using GRADE methods.
RESULTS
We included 9 RCTs (n = 2093 patients). We found no difference in mortality in patients treated with HFNC (relative risk [RR] 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67-1.31, moderate certainty) compared to conventional oxygen therapy. We found a decreased risk of requiring intubation (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.74-0.99) or escalation of oxygen therapy (defined as crossover to HFNC in the control group, or initiation of non-invasive ventilation or invasive mechanical ventilation in either group) favouring HFNC-treated patients (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.51-0.98), although certainty in both outcomes was low due to imprecision and issues related to risk of bias. HFNC had no effect on intensive care unit length of stay (mean difference [MD] 1.38 days more, 95% CI 0.90 days fewer to 3.66 days more, low certainty), hospital length of stay (MD 0.85 days fewer, 95% CI 2.07 days fewer to 0.37 days more, moderate certainty), patient reported comfort (SMD 0.12 lower, 95% CI 0.61 lower to 0.37 higher, very low certainty) or patient reported dyspnea (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.16 lower, 95% CI 1.10 lower to 1.42 higher, low certainty). Complications of treatment were variably reported amongst included studies, but little harm was associated with HFNC use.
CONCLUSION
In patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, HFNC may decrease the need for tracheal intubation without impacting mortality.
Topics: Cannula; Humans; Hypoxia; Oxygen; Oxygen Inhalation Therapy; Respiratory Insufficiency; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30888444
DOI: 10.1007/s00134-019-05590-5 -
Intensive Care Medicine Feb 2022Systematic review and network meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy of noninvasive respiratory strategies, including noninvasive positive pressure ventilation... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Systematic review and network meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy of noninvasive respiratory strategies, including noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) and high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC), in reducing extubation failure among critically ill adults.
METHODS
We searched databases from inception through October 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating noninvasive respiratory support therapies (NIPPV, HFNC, conventional oxygen therapy, or a combination of these) following extubation in critically ill adults. Two reviewers performed screening, full text review, and extraction independently. The primary outcome of interest was reintubation. We used GRADE to rate the certainty of our findings.
RESULTS
We included 36 RCTs (6806 patients). Compared to conventional oxygen therapy, NIPPV (OR 0.65 [95% CI 0.52-0.82]) and HFNC (OR 0.63 [95% CI 0.45-0.87]) reduced reintubation (both moderate certainty). Sensitivity analyses showed that the magnitude of the effect was highest in patients with increased baseline risk of reintubation. As compared to HFNC, no difference in incidence of reintubation was seen with NIPPV (OR 1.04 [95% CI 0.78-1.38], low certainty). Compared to conventional oxygen therapy, neither NIPPV (OR 0.8 [95% CI 0.61-1.04], moderate certainty) or HFNC (OR 0.9 [95% CI 0.66-1.24], low certainty) reduced short-term mortality. Consistent findings were demonstrated across multiple subgroups, including high- and low-risk patients. These results were replicated when evaluating noninvasive strategies for prevention (prophylaxis), but not in rescue (application only after evidence of deterioration) situations.
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings suggest that both NIPPV and HFNC reduced reintubation in critically ill adults, compared to conventional oxygen therapy. NIPPV did not reduce incidence of reintubation when compared to HFNC. These findings support the preventative application of noninvasive respiratory support strategies to mitigate extubation failure in critically ill adults, but not in rescue conditions.
Topics: Adult; Airway Extubation; Cannula; Critical Illness; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Noninvasive Ventilation; Oxygen Inhalation Therapy; Respiratory Insufficiency
PubMed: 34825256
DOI: 10.1007/s00134-021-06581-1 -
European Respiratory Review : An... Jun 2023The effect of noninvasive respiratory support (NRS), including high-flow nasal oxygen, bi-level positive airway pressure and continuous positive airway pressure... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The effect of noninvasive respiratory support (NRS), including high-flow nasal oxygen, bi-level positive airway pressure and continuous positive airway pressure (noninvasive ventilation (NIV)), for preventing and treating post-extubation respiratory failure is still unclear. Our objective was to assess the effects of NRS on post-extubation respiratory failure, defined as re-intubation secondary to post-extubation respiratory failure (primary outcome). Secondary outcomes included the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), discomfort, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital mortality, ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS), and time to re-intubation. Subgroup analyses considered "prophylactic" "therapeutic" NRS application and subpopulations (high-risk, low-risk, post-surgical and hypoxaemic patients).
METHODS
We undertook a systematic review and network meta-analysis (Research Registry: reviewregistry1435). PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, Scopus and Web of Science were searched (from inception until 22 June 2022). Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the use of NRS after extubation in ICU adult patients were included.
RESULTS
32 RCTs entered the quantitative analysis (5063 patients). Compared with conventional oxygen therapy, NRS overall reduced re-intubations and VAP (moderate certainty). NIV decreased hospital mortality (moderate certainty), and hospital and ICU LOS (low and very low certainty, respectively), and increased discomfort (moderate certainty). Prophylactic NRS did not prevent extubation failure in low-risk or hypoxaemic patients.
CONCLUSION
Prophylactic NRS may reduce the rate of post-extubation respiratory failure in ICU patients.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Airway Extubation; Network Meta-Analysis; Respiration, Artificial; Noninvasive Ventilation; Respiratory Insufficiency; Oxygen; Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37019458
DOI: 10.1183/16000617.0196-2022 -
Journal of Advanced Nursing Nov 2017To determine the effects of low-flow oxygen therapy with humidified or non-humidified oxygen in adult patients. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIMS
To determine the effects of low-flow oxygen therapy with humidified or non-humidified oxygen in adult patients.
BACKGROUND
Although non-humidified oxygen in low-flow oxygen therapy is recommended by many guidelines, humidifying oxygen regardless of oxygen flow has been routinely performed in China and Japan and further studies are needed to evaluate the evidence.
DESIGN
A systematic review and meta-analysis that comply with the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration were conducted.
DATA SOURCES
Studies (1980-2016) were identified by searching PUBMED, EMBASE, Science Direct, Cochrane library, CNKI and Wanfang Database.
METHODS
We performed a comprehensive, systematic meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on the efficacy of humidified and non-humidified low-flow oxygen therapy. Summary risk ratios or weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using a fixed- or random-effects model.
RESULTS
Twenty-seven randomized controlled trials with a total number of 8,876 patients were included. Non-humidified oxygen offers more benefits in reducing the bacterial contamination of humidifier bottles, as shown by the mean operating time for oxygen administration and the respiratory infections compared with humidified oxygen therapy. No significant differences were found in dry nose, dry nose and throat, nosebleed, chest discomfort, the smell of oxygen and SpO changes.
CONCLUSIONS
The routine humidification of oxygen in low-flow oxygen therapy is not justifiable and non-humidified oxygen tends to be more beneficial. However, considering that the quality of most included studies is poor, rigorously designed, large-scale randomized controlled trials are still needed to identify the role of non-humidified oxygen therapy.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Humidity; Oxygen Inhalation Therapy
PubMed: 28440960
DOI: 10.1111/jan.13323 -
Heart & Lung : the Journal of Critical... 2022Active cycle breathing technique (ACBT), which includes cycle of breathing control, thoracic expansion exercises and forced expiratory technique (FET), appears to have... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Active cycle breathing technique (ACBT), which includes cycle of breathing control, thoracic expansion exercises and forced expiratory technique (FET), appears to have beneficial effects in patients with a variety of respiratory diseases. This systematic review provides an update on the new related studies, expanding the evidence base through the last 12 years and specifically evaluating the effectiveness of ACBT on pulmonary function-related outcome variables in patients with chronic respiratory diseases.
METHODS
MEDLINE/Pubmed, PEDro, and Cochrane Library for Randomized Controlled Trials were searched between September 2008 and December 2021, in continuance of a previous systematic review, to identify randomized clinical trials and/or crossover studies comparing ACBT to other respiratory treatment techniques in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases, cystic fibrosis, or bronchiectasis.
RESULTS
Eleven studies were included and the quality of most of them was moderate to good. The outcomes most frequently assessed were forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV), sputum wet weight, forced vital capacity (FVC), and peak expiratory flow rate. Secondary outcomes were quality of life and dyspnea. Various comparators were identified and most of them assessed the ACBT as an effective method in comparison with other respiratory treatment modalities. Most studies revealed that ACBT/FET had at least an equally beneficial short-term effect on sputum wet weight, FEV and FVC compared to other treatment methods.
CONCLUSION
The results of this updating review reinforced the data of a previous systematic review regarding the beneficial impact of ACBT for the short-term improvement in respiratory tract secretions clearance and pulmonary function. ACBT is effective in increasing the expectorated sputum volume, in reducing viscoelasticity of the secretion and in relieving symptoms such as dyspnea.
Topics: Bronchiectasis; Drainage, Postural; Humans; Quality of Life; Respiratory Therapy; Sputum
PubMed: 35235877
DOI: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2022.02.006 -
Pediatric Critical Care Medicine : a... Feb 2023We present a systematic review on the effectiveness of noninvasive respiratory support techniques in bronchiolitis. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
We present a systematic review on the effectiveness of noninvasive respiratory support techniques in bronchiolitis.
DATA SOURCES
Systematic review with pairwise meta-analyses of all studies and network meta-analyses of the clinical trials.
STUDY SELECTION
Patients below 24 months old with bronchiolitis who require noninvasive respiratory support were included in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCT, and cohort studies in which high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) was compared with conventional low-flow oxygen therapy (LFOT) and/or noninvasive ventilation (NIV).
DATA EXTRACTION
Emergency wards and hospitalized patients with bronchiolitis.
DATA SYNTHESIS
A total of 3,367 patients were analyzed in 14 RCTs and 8,385 patients in 14 non-RCTs studies. Only in nonexperimental studies, HFNC is associated with a lower risk of invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) than NIV (odds ratio, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.42-0.58), with no differences in experimental studies. There were no differences between HFNC and NIV in other outcomes. HFNC is more effective than LFOT in reducing oxygen days and treatment failure. In the network meta-analyses of clinical trials, NIV was the most effective intervention to avoid invasive MV (surface under the cumulative ranking curve [SUCRA], 57.03%) and to reduce days under oxygen therapy (SUCRA, 79.42%), although crossover effect estimates between interventions showed no significant differences. The included studies show methodological heterogeneity, but it is only statistically significant for the reduction of days of oxygen therapy and length of hospital stay.
CONCLUSIONS
Experimental evidence does not suggest that high-flow oxygen therapy has advantages over LFOT as initial treatment nor over NIV as a rescue treatment.
Topics: Humans; Bronchiolitis; Cannula; Network Meta-Analysis; Noninvasive Ventilation; Oxygen; Oxygen Inhalation Therapy; Infant
PubMed: 36661419
DOI: 10.1097/PCC.0000000000003139 -
Chest Dec 2020The recent pandemic highlights the essential nature of optimizing the use of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in complex critical care settings. This review of...
BACKGROUND
The recent pandemic highlights the essential nature of optimizing the use of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in complex critical care settings. This review of reviews maps evidence-based practices (EBPs) that are associated with better outcomes among adult patients with acute respiratory failure or ARDS on the continuum of care, from intubation to liberation.
RESEARCH QUESTION
What EPBs are recommended to reduce the duration of IMV and mortality rate among patients with acute respiratory failure/ARDS?
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS
We identified an initial set of reports that links EBPs to mortality rates and/or duration of IMV. We conducted a review of reviews, focusing on preappraised guidelines, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews. We searched Scopus, CINAHL, and PubMed from January 2016 to January 2019 for additional evidence that has not yet been incorporated into current guidelines.
RESULTS
Our initial search produced 61 publications that contained 42 EBPs. We excluded 42 manuscripts during the data extraction process, primarily because they were not associated with improved patient outcomes. The remaining 19 preappraised guidelines, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews met our full inclusion criteria and spanned the continuum of IMV care from intubation to liberation. These contained 20 EBPs, a majority of which were supported with moderate levels of evidence. Of these, six EBPs focused on intubation and escalation of care, such as ventilator management and synchrony; ten EBPs reduced complications associated with IMV, which included spontaneous awakening and breathing trials and early mobility protocols; and four EBPs promoted timely extubation and postextubation recovery.
INTERPRETATION
This review describes EBPs that are associated with fewer ventilator days and/or lower mortality rates among patients who received IMV for acute respiratory failure/ARDS. Many of these EBPs are connected across the care continuum, which indicates the need to promote and assess effective implementation jointly, rather than individually.
Topics: Critical Pathways; Duration of Therapy; Evidence-Based Practice; Humans; Respiration, Artificial; Respiratory Distress Syndrome; Respiratory Insufficiency; Survival Analysis
PubMed: 32682771
DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2020.06.080 -
The Lancet. Respiratory Medicine Feb 2019Use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in adults with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome has increased in the past 10 years. However, the efficacy of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in adults with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome has increased in the past 10 years. However, the efficacy of venovenous ECMO in people with acute respiratory distress syndrome is uncertain according to the most recent data. We aimed to estimate the effect of venovenous ECMO on mortality from acute respiratory distress syndrome.
METHODS
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE (including MEDLINE In-Process and Epub Ahead of Print), Embase and the Wiley search platform in the Cochrane database for randomised controlled trials and observational studies with matching of conventional mechanical ventilation with and without venovenous ECMO in adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Titles, abstracts, and full-text articles were screened in duplicate by two investigators. Data for study design, patient characteristics, interventions, and study outcomes were abstracted independently and in duplicate. Studies were weighted with the inverse variance method and data were pooled via random-effects modelling. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs to summarise results. The primary outcome was 60-day mortality across randomised controlled trials. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines were used to rate the quality of evidence FINDINGS: We included five studies, two randomised controlled trials and three observational studies with matching techniques (total N=773 patients). In the primary analysis, which included two randomised controlled trials with a total population of 429 patients, 60-day mortality was significantly lower in the venovenous ECMO group than in the control group (73 [34%] of 214 vs 101 [47%] of 215; RR 0·73 [95% CI 0·58-0·92]; p=0·008; I 0%). The GRADE level of evidence for this outcome was moderate. Three studies included data for the incidence of major haemorrhage in the ECMO group. 48 (19%) of the 251 patients in these three studies had major haemorrhages.
INTERPRETATION
Compared with conventional mechanical ventilation, use of venovenous ECMO in adults with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome was associated with reduced 60-day mortality. However, venovenous ECMO was also associated with a moderate risk of major bleeding. These findings have important implications surrounding decision making for management of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome at centres providing venovenous ECMO.
FUNDING
None.
Topics: Adult; Cause of Death; Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation; Female; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Observational Studies as Topic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Reference Values; Respiration, Artificial; Respiratory Distress Syndrome; Risk Assessment; Severity of Illness Index; Survival Analysis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30642776
DOI: 10.1016/S2213-2600(18)30452-1 -
International Journal of Chronic... 2022To evaluate the clinical efficacy of high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (HFNC) and non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
High-Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen Therapy versus Non-Invasive Ventilation for AECOPD Patients After Extubation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the clinical efficacy of high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (HFNC) and non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) after extubation.
RESEARCH METHODS
This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statements. The primary outcome measures analyzed included: reintubation rate, mortality, complication rate, and ICU length of stay.
RESULTS
Eight studies were included, with a total of 612 subjects, including 297 in the HFNC group and 315 in the NIV group. The effect of HFNC and NIV on the reintubation rate of AECOPD patients after extubation, RR (1.49 [95% CI,0.95 to 2.33], P = 0.082). Subgroup analysis with or without hypercapnia according to the included AECOPD population, with hypercapnia, RR (0.69 [95% CI,0.33 to 1.44], P=0.317), without hypercapnia, RR (2.61 [95% CI,1.41 to 4.83], P=0.002). Mortality, RR (0.92 [95% CI,0.56 to 1.52], P = 0.752). ICU length of stay, MD (-0.44 [95% CI,-1.01 to 0.13], P = 0.132). Complication rate, RR (0.22 [95% CI,0.13 to 0.39], P = 0.000). After subgroup analysis, the reintubation rate of HFNC and NIV has no statistical difference in patients with hypercapnia, but NIV can significantly reduce the reintubation rate in patients without hypercapnia. In the outcome measures of complication rate, HFNC significantly reduced complication rate compared with NIV. In mortality and ICU length of stay, analysis results showed that HFNC and NIV were not statistically different.
CONCLUSION
According to the available evidence, the application of HFNC can be used as an alternative treatment for NIV after extubation in AECOPD patients with hypercapnia, but in the patients without hypercapnia, HFNC is less effective than NIV.
Topics: Airway Extubation; Cannula; Humans; Hypercapnia; Noninvasive Ventilation; Oxygen; Oxygen Inhalation Therapy; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiratory Insufficiency
PubMed: 36065316
DOI: 10.2147/COPD.S375107 -
International Journal of Environmental... Jun 2021This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to provide scientific evidence regarding the effects of training on respiratory muscle training's impact with the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Inspiratory Muscle Training Program Using the PowerBreath: Does It Have Ergogenic Potential for Respiratory and/or Athletic Performance? A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.
This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to provide scientific evidence regarding the effects of training on respiratory muscle training's impact with the PowerBreath. A systematic analysis based on the guides and a conducted research structured around the bases of Web of Science, Scopus, Medline/PubMed, SciELO y Cochrane Library Plus. Six articles published before January 2021 were included. The documentation and quantification of heterogeneity in every meta-analysis were directed through Cochran's Q test and the statistic I; additionally, a biased publication analysis was made using funnel plots, whose asymmetry was quantified Egger's regression. The methodological quality was assessed through McMaster's. PowerBreath administering a ≥ 15% resistive load of the maximum inspiratory pressure (PIM) achieves significant improvements (54%) in said pressure within 4 weeks of commencing the inspiratory muscle training. The maximal volume of oxygen (VOmax) considerable enhancements was achieved from the 6 weeks associated with the maximum inspiratory pressure ≥ 21.5% post inspiratory muscle training onwards. Conversely, a significant blood lactate concentration decrement occurred from the 4th week of inspiratory muscle training, after a maximum inspiratory pressure ≥ 6.8% increment. PowerBreath is a useful device to stimulate sport performance and increase pulmonary function.
Topics: Athletic Performance; Breathing Exercises; Lung; Respiratory Muscles; Respiratory Therapy
PubMed: 34206354
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18136703