Onlak Makdee1, Apichaya Monsomboon1, Usapan Surabenjawong1, Nattakarn Praphruetkit1, Wansiri Chaisirin1, Tipa Chakorn1, Chairat Permpikul2, Phakphoom Thiravit3, Tanyaporn Nakornchai4. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. 2. Division of Critical Care, the Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. 3. Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. 4. Department of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. Electronic address: tanyaporn.ploy@gmail.com.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: High-flow nasal cannula is a new method for delivering high-flow supplemental oxygen for victims of respiratory failure. This randomized controlled trial compares high-flow nasal cannula with conventional oxygen therapy in emergency department (ED) patients with cardiogenic pulmonary edema. METHODS: We conducted an open-label randomized controlled trial in the ED of Siriraj Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand. Patients aged 18 years or older with cardiogenic pulmonary edema were randomly assigned to receive either conventional oxygen therapy or high-flow nasal cannula. The primary outcome was the respiratory rate 60 minutes postintervention. RESULTS: We enrolled 128 participants (65 in the conventional oxygen therapy and 63 in the high-flow nasal cannula groups). Baseline high-flow nasal cannula and conventional oxygen therapy mean respiratory rates were 28.7 breaths/min (SD 3.2) and 28.6 breaths/min (SD 3.5). Mean respiratory rates at 60 minutes postintervention were lower in the high-flow nasal cannula group (21.8 versus 25.1 breaths/min; difference 3.3; 95% confidence interval 1.9 to 4.6). No significant differences were found in the admission rate, ED and hospital lengths of stay, noninvasive ventilation, intubation, or mortality. CONCLUSION: In patients with cardiogenic pulmonary edema in the ED, high-flow nasal cannula therapy may decrease the severity of dyspnea during the first hour of treatment.
RCT Entities:
STUDY OBJECTIVE: High-flow nasal cannula is a new method for delivering high-flow supplemental oxygen for victims of respiratory failure. This randomized controlled trial compares high-flow nasal cannula with conventional oxygen therapy in emergency department (ED) patients with cardiogenic pulmonary edema. METHODS: We conducted an open-label randomized controlled trial in the ED of Siriraj Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand. Patients aged 18 years or older with cardiogenic pulmonary edema were randomly assigned to receive either conventional oxygen therapy or high-flow nasal cannula. The primary outcome was the respiratory rate 60 minutes postintervention. RESULTS: We enrolled 128 participants (65 in the conventional oxygen therapy and 63 in the high-flow nasal cannula groups). Baseline high-flow nasal cannula and conventional oxygen therapy mean respiratory rates were 28.7 breaths/min (SD 3.2) and 28.6 breaths/min (SD 3.5). Mean respiratory rates at 60 minutes postintervention were lower in the high-flow nasal cannula group (21.8 versus 25.1 breaths/min; difference 3.3; 95% confidence interval 1.9 to 4.6). No significant differences were found in the admission rate, ED and hospital lengths of stay, noninvasive ventilation, intubation, or mortality. CONCLUSION: In patients with cardiogenic pulmonary edema in the ED, high-flow nasal cannula therapy may decrease the severity of dyspnea during the first hour of treatment.
Authors: Josep Masip; W Frank Peacock; Susanna Price; Louise Cullen; F Javier Martin-Sanchez; Petar Seferovic; Alan S Maisel; Oscar Miro; Gerasimos Filippatos; Christiaan Vrints; Michael Christ; Martin Cowie; Elke Platz; John McMurray; Salvatore DiSomma; Uwe Zeymer; Hector Bueno; Chris P Gale; Maddalena Lettino; Mucio Tavares; Frank Ruschitzka; Alexandre Mebazaa; Veli-Pekka Harjola; Christian Mueller Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2018-01-01 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: B Rochwerg; D Granton; D X Wang; Y Helviz; S Einav; J P Frat; A Mekontso-Dessap; A Schreiber; E Azoulay; A Mercat; A Demoule; V Lemiale; A Pesenti; E D Riviello; T Mauri; J Mancebo; L Brochard; K Burns Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2019-03-19 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Sang Yong Om; Junho Hyun; Kyung Hun Nam; Sun Hack Lee; Seung Min Song; Jung Ae Hong; Sang Eun Lee; Min-Seok Kim Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2019-09 Impact factor: 2.895
Authors: Arianne K Baldomero; Anne C Melzer; Nancy Greer; Brittany N Majeski; Roderick MacDonald; Eric J Linskens; Timothy J Wilt Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2021-04-27 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Marina E Boules; Nabila Ibrahim Laz; Ahmed A Elberry; Raghda R S Hussein; Mohamed E A Abdelrahim Journal: Beni Suef Univ J Basic Appl Sci Date: 2022-04-15