TY - JOUR
T1 - Moderate certainty evidence suggests the use of high-flow nasal cannula does not decrease hypoxia when compared with conventional oxygen therapy in the peri-intubation period
T2 - Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis
AU - Chaudhuri, Dipayan
AU - Granton, David
AU - Wang, Dominic Xiang
AU - Einav, Sharon
AU - Helviz, Yigal
AU - Mauri, Tommaso
AU - Ricard, Jean Damien
AU - Mancebo, Jordi
AU - Frat, Jean Pierre
AU - Jog, Sameer
AU - Hernandez, Gonzalo
AU - Maggiore, Salvatore M.
AU - Hodgson, Carol
AU - Jaber, Samir
AU - Brochard, Laurent
AU - Burns, Karen E.A.
AU - Rochwerg, Bram
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2020 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright:
Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2020/4
Y1 - 2020/4
N2 - Objective: The role of high-flow nasal cannula during and before intubation is unclear despite a number of randomized clinical trials. Our objective was to conduct a systematic review and metaanalysis examining the benefits of high-flow nasal cannula in the peri-intubation period. Data Sources: We performed a comprehensive search of relevant databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science). Study Selection: We included randomized clinical trials that compared high-flow nasal cannula to other noninvasive oxygen delivery systems in the peri-intubation period. Data Extraction: Our primary outcome was severe desaturation (defined as peripheral oxygen saturation reading < 80% during intubation). Secondary outcomes included peri-intubation complications, apneic time, Pao2 before and after intubation, Paco2 after intubation, ICU length of stay, and short-term mortality. Data Synthesis: We included 10 randomized clinical trials (n = 1,017 patients). High-flow nasal cannula had no effect on the occurrence rate of peri-intubation hypoxemia (relative risk, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.68-1.42; 0.3% absolute risk reduction, moderate certainty), serious complications (relative risk, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.71-1.06), apneic time (mean difference, 10.3 s higher with high-flow nasal cannula; 95% CI, 11.0 s lower to 31.7 s higher), Pao2 measured after preoxygenation (mean difference, 3.6 mm Hg higher; 95% CI, 3.5 mm Hg lower to 10.7 mm Hg higher), or Pao2 measured after intubation (mean difference, 27.0 mm Hg higher; 95% CI, 13.2 mm Hg lower to 67.2 mm Hg higher), when compared with conventional oxygen therapy. There was also no effect on postintubation Paco2, ICU length of stay, or 28-day mortality. Conclusions: We found moderate-to-low certainty evidence that the use of high-flow nasal cannula likely has no effect on severe desaturation, serious complications, apneic time, oxygenation, ICU length of stay, or overall survival when used in the peri-intu- bation period when compared with conventional oxygen therapy.
AB - Objective: The role of high-flow nasal cannula during and before intubation is unclear despite a number of randomized clinical trials. Our objective was to conduct a systematic review and metaanalysis examining the benefits of high-flow nasal cannula in the peri-intubation period. Data Sources: We performed a comprehensive search of relevant databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science). Study Selection: We included randomized clinical trials that compared high-flow nasal cannula to other noninvasive oxygen delivery systems in the peri-intubation period. Data Extraction: Our primary outcome was severe desaturation (defined as peripheral oxygen saturation reading < 80% during intubation). Secondary outcomes included peri-intubation complications, apneic time, Pao2 before and after intubation, Paco2 after intubation, ICU length of stay, and short-term mortality. Data Synthesis: We included 10 randomized clinical trials (n = 1,017 patients). High-flow nasal cannula had no effect on the occurrence rate of peri-intubation hypoxemia (relative risk, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.68-1.42; 0.3% absolute risk reduction, moderate certainty), serious complications (relative risk, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.71-1.06), apneic time (mean difference, 10.3 s higher with high-flow nasal cannula; 95% CI, 11.0 s lower to 31.7 s higher), Pao2 measured after preoxygenation (mean difference, 3.6 mm Hg higher; 95% CI, 3.5 mm Hg lower to 10.7 mm Hg higher), or Pao2 measured after intubation (mean difference, 27.0 mm Hg higher; 95% CI, 13.2 mm Hg lower to 67.2 mm Hg higher), when compared with conventional oxygen therapy. There was also no effect on postintubation Paco2, ICU length of stay, or 28-day mortality. Conclusions: We found moderate-to-low certainty evidence that the use of high-flow nasal cannula likely has no effect on severe desaturation, serious complications, apneic time, oxygenation, ICU length of stay, or overall survival when used in the peri-intu- bation period when compared with conventional oxygen therapy.
KW - Artificial respiration
KW - Hypoxia
KW - Intubation
KW - Noninvasive ventilation
KW - Oxygen inhalation therapy
KW - Systematic review
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85082380352&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/CCM.0000000000004217
DO - 10.1097/CCM.0000000000004217
M3 - Review Article
C2 - 31923025
AN - SCOPUS:85082380352
SN - 0090-3493
VL - 48
SP - 571
EP - 578
JO - Critical Care Medicine
JF - Critical Care Medicine
IS - 4
ER -