High Flow nasal cannula for prevention of intubation in acute non-hypercapnic hypoxemic respiratory failure in immunocompromised patients, a randomized controlled trial

Authors

  • Saengkaew P Division of Pulmonary, Critical care and Allergy, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University
  • Inchai J Division of Pulmonary, Critical care and Allergy, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University
  • Chanayat P Division of Pulmonary, Critical care and Allergy, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University
  • Liwsrisakun C Division of Pulmonary, Critical care and Allergy, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University

Keywords:

high flow nasal oxygen, NIV, acute non-hypercapnic hypoxemic respiratory failure, immunocompromised

Abstract

Objectives To compare the outcomes of high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) with non-invasive ventila-tion (NIV) for treatment of acute non-hypercapnic hypoxemic respiratory failure in immunocompro-mised patients.

Methods Immunocompromised patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) admitted to our university hospital were randomized 1:1 to receive either HFNC or NIV treatment in medical ICU. The primary outcome was the need for intubation and IMV within 48 hours after randomization. Secondary outcomes included ICU, 30-day and hospital mortality.

Results During the study period, 19 patients were randomized. Baseline mean respiratory rate was 28.1±4.4/min vs 27.2±5.9 /min and mean P/F ratio was 197.8±66.1 vs 204.5±44.5 in the HFNC and NIV groups, respectively. Median SOFA score was 5 (IQR,3-7) vs 3.5 (IQR,2.75-5.75) and median SAPS II score was 26 in both groups. Causes of AHRF were 61.5% infection and 38.5% non-infection. The need for intubation and IMV within 48 hours after randomization was not significantly different between groups (33.3% vs 20.0%, p = 0.51). Mortality on day 30 was 55.6% vs 40%, p = 0.64). No significant difference was observed in ICU length of stay (2 vs 5.5 days; p = 0.168) or hospital length of stay (18 vs 21 days; p = 0.836).

Conclusion Among immunocompromised patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, HFNC did not significantly decrease intubation rate at 48 hour compared with NIV.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Published

2020-07-01

How to Cite

1.
P S, J I, P C, C L. High Flow nasal cannula for prevention of intubation in acute non-hypercapnic hypoxemic respiratory failure in immunocompromised patients, a randomized controlled trial. Chiang Mai Med J. [Internet]. 2020 Jul. 1 [cited 2022 Jun. 29];59(3):127-36. Available from: https://he01.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/CMMJ-MedCMJ/article/view/245259

Issue

Section

Original Article