Noninvasive ventilation versus conventional oxygen therapy after extubation failure in high-risk patients in an intensive care unit: a pragmatic clinical trial.

Objective: To determine the effectiveness of noninvasive ventilation versus conventional oxygen therapy in patients with acute respiratory failure after extubation failure.

Methods: A pragmatic clinical trial was conducted in an intensive care unit from March 2009 to September 2016. Patients on mechanical ventilation > 24 hours who developed acute respiratory failure after scheduled extubation were included and were assigned to noninvasive ventilation or conventional oxygen therapy. The primary objective was to reduce the reintubation rate. The secondary objectives were to improve respiratory parameters and reduce complications, the duration of mechanical ventilation, the intensive care unit stay, the hospital stay, and mortality in the intensive care unit, in the hospital, and 90 days after discharge. Factors correlated with reintubation were also analyzed.

Results: Of a total of 2,574 patients, 77 were analyzed (38 in the noninvasive ventilation group and 39 in the conventional oxygen therapy group). Noninvasive ventilation reduced the respiratory and cardiac rates more rapidly than conventional oxygen therapy. Reintubation was less common in the noninvasive ventilation group [12 (32%) versus 22 (56%) in the conventional oxygen therapy group, relative risk 0.58 (95%CI 0.34 - 0.97), p = 0.039]. The rest of the parameters did not show significant differences. In the multivariate analysis, noninvasive ventilation protected against reintubation [OR 0.17 (95%CI 0.05 - 0.56), p = 0.004], while liver failure before extubation and the inability to maintain airway patency predisposed patients to reintubation.

Conclusion: The use of noninvasive ventilation in patients who failed extubation could be beneficial compared to conventional oxygen therapy.