Effect of high‑flow nasal cannula versus non‑invasive ventilation in preventing re‑intubation in high‑risk chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients: A randomised controlled trial

3Citations
Citations of this article
19Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Background: Currently, a high‑flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has been shown to improve extubation outcomes. However, there is a lack of evidence on the utilisation of HFNC in high‑risk chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of HFNC versus non‑invasive ventilation (NIV) in preventing re‑intubation following planned extubation in high‑risk COPD patients. Patients and Methods: In this prospective, randomised, controlled trial, 230 mechanically ventilated COPD patients at high risk for re‑intubation who fulfilled the criteria for planned extubation were enrolled. Post‑extubation blood gases and vital signs at 1, 24, and 48 hours were recorded. The primary outcome was the re‑intubation rate within 72 hours. Secondary outcomes included post‑extubation respiratory failure, respiratory infection, intensive care unit and hospital length of stay, and mortality rate at 60 days. Results: 230 patients after planned extubation were randomly allocated to receive either HFNC (n = 120) or NIV (n = 110). Re‑intubation within 72 hours was significantly lower in the high‑flow group: 8 patients (6.6%) versus 23 patients (20.9%) in the NIV group {absolute difference, 14.3% [95% confidence interval (CI), 10.9–16.3]; P = 0.001}. The frequency of post‑extubation respiratory failure was less in patients assigned to HFNC than in those allocated NIV (25% vs. 35.4%) [absolute difference, 10.4% (95% CI, 2.4–14.3); P = 0.001]. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding reasons for respiratory failure after extubation. It was observed that the 60‑day mortality rate was lower in patients who received HFNC than in those assigned to NIV (5% vs. 13.6%) [absolute difference, 8.6 (95% CI, 4.3 to 9.10); P = 0.001]. Conclusion: The use of HFNC after extubation appears to be superior to NIV in reducing the risk of re‑intubation within 72 hours and 60‑day mortality in high‑risk COPD patients.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Magdy, D. M., & Metwally, A. (2023). Effect of high‑flow nasal cannula versus non‑invasive ventilation in preventing re‑intubation in high‑risk chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients: A randomised controlled trial. Lung India, 40(4), 312–320. https://doi.org/10.4103/lungindia.lungindia_338_22

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free