François Stéphan1, Laurence Bérard2, Saida Rézaiguia-Delclaux3, Priscilla Amaru3. 1. Service de Réanimation adulte, Hôpital Marie Lannelongue, Le Plessis Robinson, France. f.stephan@ccml.fr. 2. APHP, GH HUEP, Hôpital St Antoine, Plateforme de recherche Clinique de l'Est Parisien (URC-Est-CRC-Est), Paris, France. 3. Service de Réanimation adulte, Hôpital Marie Lannelongue, Le Plessis Robinson, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Obese patients are considered at risk of respiratory failure after cardiothoracic surgery. High-flow nasal cannula has demonstrated its non-inferiority after cardiothoracic surgery compared to noninvasive ventilation (NIV), which is the recommended treatment in obese patients. We hypothesized that NIV was superior to high-flow nasal cannula for preventing or resolving acute respiratory failure after cardiothoracic surgery in this population. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of a randomized, controlled trial. Obese subjects were randomly assigned to receive NIV for at least 4 h/d (inspiratory pressure, 8 cm H2O; expiratory pressure, 4 cm H2O; FIO2 , 0.5) or high-flow nasal cannula delivered continuously (flow, 50 L/min, FIO2 0.5). RESULTS:Treatment failure (defined as re-intubation, switch to the other treatment, or premature discontinuation) occurred in 21 of 136 (15.4%, 95% CI 9.8-22.6%) subjects with NIV compared to 18 of 135 (13.3%, 95% CI 8.1-20.3%) subjects with high-flow nasal cannula (P = .62). No significant differences were found for dyspnea and comfort scores. Skin breakdown was significantly more common with NIV after 24 h (9.2%, 95% CI 5.0-16.0 vs 1.6%, 95% CI 1.0-6.0; P = .01). No significant differences were found for ICU mortality (5.9% for subjects with NIV vs 2.2% for subjects with high-flow nasal cannula, P = .22) or for any of the other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Among obese cardiothoracic surgery subjects with or without respiratory failure, the use of continuous high-flow nasal cannula compared to intermittent NIV (8/4 cm H2O) did not result in a worse rate of treatment failure. Because high-flow nasal cannula presents some advantages, it may be used instead of NIV in obese patients after cardiothoracic surgery.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Obesepatients are considered at risk of respiratory failure after cardiothoracic surgery. High-flow nasal cannula has demonstrated its non-inferiority after cardiothoracic surgery compared to noninvasive ventilation (NIV), which is the recommended treatment in obesepatients. We hypothesized that NIV was superior to high-flow nasal cannula for preventing or resolving acute respiratory failure after cardiothoracic surgery in this population. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of a randomized, controlled trial. Obese subjects were randomly assigned to receive NIV for at least 4 h/d (inspiratory pressure, 8 cm H2O; expiratory pressure, 4 cm H2O; FIO2 , 0.5) or high-flow nasal cannula delivered continuously (flow, 50 L/min, FIO2 0.5). RESULTS: Treatment failure (defined as re-intubation, switch to the other treatment, or premature discontinuation) occurred in 21 of 136 (15.4%, 95% CI 9.8-22.6%) subjects with NIV compared to 18 of 135 (13.3%, 95% CI 8.1-20.3%) subjects with high-flow nasal cannula (P = .62). No significant differences were found for dyspnea and comfort scores. Skin breakdown was significantly more common with NIV after 24 h (9.2%, 95% CI 5.0-16.0 vs 1.6%, 95% CI 1.0-6.0; P = .01). No significant differences were found for ICU mortality (5.9% for subjects with NIV vs 2.2% for subjects with high-flow nasal cannula, P = .22) or for any of the other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Among obese cardiothoracic surgery subjects with or without respiratory failure, the use of continuous high-flow nasal cannula compared to intermittent NIV (8/4 cm H2O) did not result in a worse rate of treatment failure. Because high-flow nasal cannula presents some advantages, it may be used instead of NIV in obesepatients after cardiothoracic surgery.
Authors: Audrey De Jong; Hermann Wrigge; Goran Hedenstierna; Luciano Gattinoni; Davide Chiumello; Jean-Pierre Frat; Lorenzo Ball; Miet Schetz; Peter Pickkers; Samir Jaber Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2020-10-23 Impact factor: 17.440