MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1164/rccm.201904-0841oc

Медицинская библиотека · American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2020

Physiological Comparison of High-Flow Nasal Cannula and Helmet Noninvasive Ventilation in Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure.

Grieco Domenico Luca, Menga Luca S, Raggi Valeria, Bongiovanni Filippo, Anzellotti Gian Marco, Tanzarella Eloisa S, Bocci Maria Grazia, Mercurio Giovanna, Dell'Anna Antonio M, Eleuteri Davide, Bello Giuseppe, Maviglia Riccardo, Conti Giorgio, Maggiore Salvatore Maurizio, Antonelli Massimo

Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

Rationale: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and helmet noninvasive ventilation (NIV) are used for the management of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.

Objectives

Physiological comparison of HFNC and helmet NIV in patients with hypoxemia.

Methods

Fifteen patients with hypoxemia with PaO2/FiO2 < 200 mm Hg received helmet NIV (positive end-expiratory pressure ≥ 10 cm H2O, pressure support = 10-15 cm H2O) and HFNC (50 L/min) in randomized crossover order. Arterial blood gases, dyspnea, and comfort were recorded. Inspiratory effort was estimated by esophageal pressure (Pes) swings. Pes-simplified pressure-time product and transpulmonary pressure swings were measured.Measurements and Main

Results

As compared with HFNC, helmet NIV increased PaO2/FiO2 (median [interquartile range]: 255 mm Hg [140-299] vs. 138 [101-172]; P = 0.001) and lowered inspiratory effort (7 cm H2O [4-11] vs. 15 [8-19]; P = 0.001) in all patients. Inspiratory effort reduction by NIV was linearly related to inspiratory effort during HFNC (r = 0.84; P < 0.001). Helmet NIV reduced respiratory rate (24 breaths/min [23-31] vs. 29 [26-32]; P = 0.027), Pes-simplified pressure-time product (93 cm H2O ⋅ s ⋅ min-1 [43-138] vs. 200 [168-335]; P = 0.001), and dyspnea (visual analog scale 3 [2-5] vs. 8 [6-9]; P = 0.002), without affecting PaCO2 (P = 0.80) and comfort (P = 0.50). In the overall cohort, transpulmonary pressure swings were not different between treatments (NIV = 18 cm H2O [14-21] vs. HFNC = 15 [8-19]; P = 0.11), but patients exhibiting lower inspiratory effort on HFNC experienced increases in transpulmonary pressure swings with helmet NIV. Higher transpulmonary pressure swings during NIV were associated with subsequent need for intubation.

Conclusions

As compared with HFNC in hypoxemic respiratory failure, helmet NIV improves oxygenation, reduces dyspnea, inspiratory effort, and simplified pressure-time product, with similar transpulmonary pressure swings, PaCO2, and comfort.

Для цитирования: Grieco Domenico Luca, Menga Luca S, Raggi Valeria, Bongiovanni Filippo, Anzellotti Gian Marco, Tanzarella Eloisa S, Bocci Maria Grazia, Mercurio Giovanna, Dell'Anna Antonio M, Eleuteri Davide, Bello Giuseppe, Maviglia Riccardo, Conti Giorgio, Maggiore Salvatore Maurizio, Antonelli Massimo. Physiological Comparison of High-Flow Nasal Cannula and Helmet Noninvasive Ventilation in Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure.. American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine. 2020. DOI: 10.1164/rccm.201904-0841oc.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.