AI Article Synopsis

  • Two reviews were conducted to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) for COVID-19 patients, focusing on its efficacy compared to traditional oxygen therapy and the potential risk of virus transmission.
  • In Review 1, 12 studies suggested that HFNC might lower the need for invasive ventilation and escalation to higher oxygen therapy but showed no major differences in mortality or hospital stay durations, with overall low to moderate certainty in results.
  • Review 2 assessed the risks of droplet dispersion and aerosol generation from HFNC, finding very low certainty evidence, with mixed results regarding whether HFNC increases viral spread, especially at higher flow rates.

Article Abstract

Purpose: We conducted two World Health Organization-commissioned reviews to inform use of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) in patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19). We synthesized the evidence regarding efficacy and safety (review 1), as well as risks of droplet dispersion, aerosol generation, and associated transmission (review 2) of viral products.

Source: Literature searches were performed in Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Chinese databases, and medRxiv. Review 1: we synthesized results from randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) comparing HFNC to conventional oxygen therapy (COT) in critically ill patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. Review 2: we narratively summarized findings from studies evaluating droplet dispersion, aerosol generation, or infection transmission associated with HFNC. For both reviews, paired reviewers independently conducted screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment. We evaluated certainty of evidence using GRADE methodology.

Principal Findings: No eligible studies included COVID-19 patients. Review 1: 12 RCTs (n = 1,989 patients) provided low-certainty evidence that HFNC may reduce invasive ventilation (relative risk [RR], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74 to 0.99) and escalation of oxygen therapy (RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.98) in patients with respiratory failure. Results provided no support for differences in mortality (moderate certainty), or in-hospital or intensive care length of stay (moderate and low certainty, respectively). Review 2: four studies evaluating droplet dispersion and three evaluating aerosol generation and dispersion provided very low certainty evidence. Two simulation studies and a crossover study showed mixed findings regarding the effect of HFNC on droplet dispersion. Although two simulation studies reported no associated increase in aerosol dispersion, one reported that higher flow rates were associated with increased regions of aerosol density.

Conclusions: High-flow nasal cannula may reduce the need for invasive ventilation and escalation of therapy compared with COT in COVID-19 patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. This benefit must be balanced against the unknown risk of airborne transmission.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7294988PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12630-020-01740-2DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

respiratory failure
16
droplet dispersion
16
high-flow nasal
12
nasal cannula
12
acute hypoxemic
12
hypoxemic respiratory
12
aerosol generation
12
infection transmission
8
dispersion aerosol
8
oxygen therapy
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!