High-flow nasal oxygen may prevent postextubation respiratory failure in the intensive care unit (ICU). The combination of high-flow nasal oxygen with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) may be an optimal strategy of ventilation to avoid reintubation. OBJECTIVE To determine whether high-flow nasal oxygen with prophylactic NIV applied immediately after extubation could reduce the rate of reintubation, compared with high-flow nasal oxygen alone, in patients at high risk of extubation failure in the ICU. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Multicenter randomized clinical trial conducted from April 2017 to January 2018 among 641 patients at high risk of extubation failure (ie, older than 65 years or with an underlying cardiac or respiratory disease) at 30 ICUs in France; follow-up was until April 2018. INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomly assigned to high-flow nasal oxygen alone (n = 306) or high-flow nasal oxygen alternating with NIV (n = 342) immediately after extubation. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary outcome was the proportion of patients reintubated at day 7; secondary outcomes included postextubation respiratory failure at day 7, reintubation rates up until ICU discharge, and ICU mortality. RESULTS Among 648 patients who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 70 [10] years; 219 women [34%]), 641 patients completed the trial. The reintubation rate at day 7 was 11.8% (95% CI, 8.4%-15.2%) (40/339) with high-flow nasal oxygen and NIV and 18.2% (95% CI, 13.9%-22.6%) (55/302) with high-flow nasal oxygen alone (difference, −6.4% [95% CI, −12.0% to −0.9%]; P = .02). Among the 11 prespecified secondary outcomes, 6 showed no significant difference. The proportion of patients with postextubation respiratory failure at day 7 (21% vs 29%; difference, −8.7% [95% CI, −15.2% to −1.8%]; P = .01) and reintubation rates up until ICU discharge (12% vs 20%, difference −7.4% [95% CI, −13.2% to −1.8%]; P = .009) were significantly lower with high-flow nasal oxygen and NIV than with high-flow nasal oxygen alone. ICU mortality rates were not significantly different: 6% with high-flow nasal oxygen and NIV and 9% with high-flow nasal oxygen alone (difference, −2.4% [95% CI, −6.7% to 1.7%]; P = .25). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEIn mechanically ventilated patients at high risk of extubation failure, the use of high-flow nasal oxygen with NIV immediately after extubation significantly decreased the risk of reintubation compared with high-flow nasal oxygen alone.
Background Little information is available about the geo-economic variations in demographics, management, and outcomes of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We aimed to characterise the effect of these geo-economic variations in patients enrolled in the Large Observational Study to Understand the Global Impact of Severe Acute Respiratory Failure (LUNG SAFE). Methods LUNG SAFE was done during 4 consecutive weeks in winter, 2014, in a convenience sample of 459 intensivecare units in 50 countries across six continents. Inclusion criteria were admission to a participating intensive-care unit (including transfers) within the enrolment window and receipt of invasive or non-invasive ventilation. One of the trial's secondary aims was to characterise variations in the demographics, management, and outcome of patients with ARDS. We used the 2016 World Bank countries classification to define three major geo-economic groupings, namely European high-income countries (Europe-High), high-income countries in the rest of the world (rWORLD-High), and middle-income countries (Middle). We compared patient outcomes across these three groupings. LUNG SAFE is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02010073. Findings Of the 2813 patients enrolled in LUNG SAFE who fulfilled ARDS criteria on day 1 or 2, 1521 (54%) were recruited from Europe-High, 746 (27%) from rWORLD-High, and 546 (19%) from Middle countries. We noted significant geographical variations in demographics, risk factors for ARDS, and comorbid diseases. The proportion of patients with severe ARDS or with ratios of the partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO 2) to the fractional concentration of oxygen in inspired air (F I O 2) less than 150 was significantly lower in rWORLD-High countries than in the two other regions. Use of prone positioning and neuromuscular blockade was significantly more common in Europe-High countries than in the other two regions. Adjusted duration of invasive mechanical ventilation and length of stay in the intensive-care unit were significantly shorter in patients in rWORLD-High countries than in Europe-High or Middle countries. High gross national income per person was associated with increased survival in ARDS; hospital survival was significantly lower in Middle countries than in Europe-High or rWORLD-High countries. Interpretation Important geo-economic differences exist in the severity, clinician recognition, and management of ARDS, and in patients' outcomes. Income per person and outcomes in ARDS are independently associated.
Background Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are exposed to many sources of discomfort. Although growing attention has been given to the detection and treatment of pain, very little has been given to the detection and treatment of dyspnea (defined as ‘breathing discomfort’). Discussion In this article, we review the published information on prevalence, mechanisms and potential negative impacts of dyspnea in mechanically ventilated patients. In addition, we review the most appropriate tools to detect and quantify dyspnea in ICU patients. Conclusions Growing evidence suggests that dyspnea is a frequent issue in mechanically ventilated ICU patients, is highly associated with anxiety and pain, and is improved in many patients by altering ventilator settings. Future studies are needed to better delineate the impact of dyspnea in the ICU, and to define diagnostic, monitoring and therapeutic protocols.
BackgroundDiaphragm dysfunction is defined by a value of twitch tracheal pressure in response to magnetic phrenic stimulation (twitch pressure) amounting to less than 11 cmH2O. This study assessed whether this threshold or a lower one would predict accurately weaning failure from mechanical ventilation. Twitch pressure was compared to ultrasound measurement of diaphragm function.MethodsIn patients undergoing a first spontaneous breathing trial, diaphragm function was evaluated by twitch pressure and by diaphragm ultrasound (thickening fraction). Receiver operating characteristics curves were computed to determine the best thresholds predicting failure of spontaneous breathing trial.ResultsSeventy-six patients were evaluated, 48 (63%) succeeded and 28 (37%) failed the spontaneous breathing trial. The optimal thresholds of twitch pressure and thickening fraction to predict failure of the spontaneous breathing trial were, respectively, 7.2 cmH2O and 25.8%, respectively. The receiver operating characteristics curves were 0.80 (95% CI 0.70–0.89) for twitch pressure and 0.82 (95% CI 0.73–0.93) for thickening fraction. Both receiver operating characteristics curves were similar (p = 0.83). A twitch pressure value lower than 11 cmH2O (the traditional cutoff for diaphragm dysfunction) predicted failure of the spontaneous breathing trial with a sensitivity of 89% (95% CI 72–98%) and a specificity of 45% (95% CI 30–60%).ConclusionsFailure of spontaneous breathing trial can be predicted with a lower value of twitch pressure than the value defining diaphragm dysfunction. Twitch pressure and thickening fraction had similar strong performance in the prediction of failure of the spontaneous breathing trial.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13613-018-0401-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.