COVID-19 pneumonia - increased incidence of pneumothorax/mediastinal emphysema after invasive mechanical and non-invasive ventilation.

Introduction: COVID pneumonia can lead to pneumomediastinum or pneumothorax during non-invasive or invasive mechanical ventilation. This affects the prognosis. Methodology: During the study period, 121 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infections and invasive or non-invasive ventilation therapy were recorded in our hospital. All patients with a pneumothorax or pneumomediastinum were analyzed in more detail. Result(s): Pneumothorax and pneumomediastinum occurred in 12 patients and resulted in 7 deaths. Discussion(s): The incidence of pneumothorax with COVID infection ranges from 0.56 to 1%, reaching 3.5% in our own studies and 4.2% under invasive mechanical ventilation. The incidence of pneumomediastinum was 10% and 9.2% in our own patients. Overall mortality was 58.3% and similar to that reported in the literature, up to 60%.Copyright © 2023 Dustri-Verlag Dr. K. Feistle.

Utility of High Flow Nasal Oxygen versus Non-Invasive Ventilation in Severe Covid-19 Pneumonia: Retrospective Comparative Analysis and Assessment in Present Scenario Patients

Background: The pandemic of COVID-19 since its beginning has created havoc all-round the globe. The role of oxygen therapy remains constant. Various modalities have been studied for oxygen delivery to hypoxic patients but high flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) has lately gained importance in terms of non-invasive oxygen delivery, easy administration and great improvement in patient's recovery. We conducted this retrospective analysis with the primary objective of looking for the proportion of patients who were successfully weaned off of HFNO or non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and the secondary aim was to look for duration of hospital stay and its effect on clinical recovery based on laboratory parameters. Methods: All patients, positive for COVID-19 infection by real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RTPCR) were admitted to covid ICU or ward with oxygen requirement and were treated with either NIV or HFNO were enrolled for the study. Patients were grouped under H group (HFNO) or N group (NIV). Daily ABG readings, chest x-ray, respiratory rate, hemodynamic parameters and urine output were noted on 12 hourly intervals. Any changes in above parameters along with need for intubation were assessed. Results: Patients from both the groups showed significant improvement in their oxygen saturation by the fifth day of their treatment. Fourteen patients from the NIV group and 10 from the HFNO group had saturation >90% by Day 5. Of those who presented with saturation of <85%, 2 out of 5 in the NIV group (40%) and 1 of the 2 patients in the HFNO group (50%) showed improvement in their oxygen saturation. The P/F was statistically comparable (p 0.928) in both groups. The levels of bio markers, and the improvement was comparable and correlated with clinical improvement as well. Conclusion: We conclude that though HFNO is accepted better than NIV, the improvement in the respiratory status of the patient was comparable with both the treatment modalities and hence we do not recommend use of HFNO, especially in a situation of gross deficit of oxygen availability as compared to the exponential rise in the demand. © 2023 Tehran University of Medical Sciences.

Comparison of High-Flow Nasal Canula and Non-Invasive Mechanical Ventilation in Treating COVID-19 Patients

Objectives: The World Health Organization has declared COVID-19 a global pandemic in March 2020. Multiple COVID-19 waves are putting tremendous stress on healthcare systems. Evidence showed that high-flow nasal canula (HFNC) reduced the need for mechanical ventilation and shortened the time to clinical recovery among patients with severe COVID-19. This study aimed to assess the effect of using HFNC compared to non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV), on adult patients with COVID-19. Method(s): This retrospective study included patients hospitalized due to COVID-19 between October 2020 to December 2021 with appropriate ICD-10 diagnosis recorded in a commercially available, all-payer administrative database across 300+ hospitals. The identified patients were divided in two cohorts, one being the patients treated with HFNC as the first line respiratory support and another with NIV. Outcomes included all-cause mortality rate and length of stay. Multivariable analyses were performed to adjust for baseline characteristics. Result(s): Out of 16,534 eligible patients, 4,334 patients received HFNC as the first line respiratory support, whereas 12,200 received NIV. The all-cause mortality rate was 20.24% and 37.14% in the HFNC and NIV group, respectively. After adjusting for baseline characteristics, the all-cause mortality rate in the HFNC group was lower compared to NIV (odds ratio [OR], 0.51;95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47-0.55;p<0.001). The total length of stay was around 15 days for all patients. No different was observed between groups ( mean difference 0.3 days;95% CI, -0.27 - 0.92 days;p>0.05). Conclusion(s): Patients treated with HFNC showed lower mortality rates compared to NIV for hospitalized COVID-19 patients. However, further studies are still needed to better elucidate the clinical and economic benefit of HFNC in COVID-19 patients.Copyright © 2023

Peripartum Covid 19 admissions in an intensive care unit - Case series

Introduction: Peripartum women are at increased risk for severe illness with coronavirus disease (Covid-19) infection. Recent medical literature has drawn attention to the possible influence of COVID-19 on the course of pregnancies and its long-term effects.1-5 Objective: This case series aimed to observe the clinical course of peripartum women with confirmed Covid-19 admitted to a critical care unit in the North-west of England. Method(s): Since the start of the pandemic, all pregnant women with Covid-19 infection admitted to the critical care unit were monitored and followed up. Demographic profile, medical co-morbidities, treatment received, respiratory support and vaccination status were noted. Result(s): From March 2020 until February 2022, 8 women in our practice were shifted to the critical care unit post-partum in view of worsening work of breathing & increasing oxygen requirement after initial management in the delivery suite. All admissions were during the 3rd wave of the pandemic in the UK, between June to October 2021. 5 patients underwent Caesarean section under spinal anesthesia & 3 were shifted post normal vaginal delivery. Mean age in the study population was 33.25 years (SD +/- 3.99) and mean length of stay in the ICU was 6.62 days (SD +/- 3.99). Only one woman required intubation & mechanical ventilation for 10 days and the rest were managed on High Flow Nasal Cannula (HFNC) or Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) hood and self-proning manoeuvres. 50% of the patients received Tocilizumab. All women were discharged home and there were no maternal deaths. Pre- admission none of the women were vaccinated, but on follow up 5 out of the 8 had completed their vaccination. All women were emotionally distraught due to being isolated from their family and new born. When reviewed at 12 weeks, one patient experienced post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and one had features of long Covid syndrome. On follow up, all new born babies were doing well. Conclusion(s): From the limited amount of data available, psychological stress was common to all patients. Being isolated from their new-born and family was the most difficult emotional aspect for the mothers in addition to finding it difficult to breathe and uncertainty about the future. Most mothers and new-born babies were discharged from the hospital without any serious complications. However, further observation and long term follow up is imperative. Use of guidelines in peripartum patients will aid in appropriate escalation of care. Key words: COVID-19, Pregnancy, Peri-partum, Long Covid syndrome.

Clinical characteristics and risk factors of patients with COVID-19 developing barotrauma

Background: At our hospital, people with COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) had a high rate of pulmonary barotrauma. Therefore, the current study looked at barotrauma in COVID-19 patients getting invasive and non-invasive positive pressure ventilation to assess its prevalence, clinical results, and features. Methodology: Our retrospective cohort study comprised of adult COVID-19 pneumonia patients who visited our tertiary care hospital between April 2020 and September 2021 and developed barotrauma. Result(s): Sixty-eight patients were included in this study. Subcutaneous emphysema was the most frequent type of barotrauma, reported at 67.6%;pneumomediastinum, reported at 61.8%;pneumothorax, reported at 47.1%. The most frequent device associated with barotrauma was CPAP (51.5%). Among the 68 patients, 27.9% were discharged without supplemental oxygen, while 4.4% were discharged on oxygen. 76.5% of the patients expired because of COVID pneumonia and its complications. In addition, 38.2% of the patients required invasive mechanical breathing, and 77.9% of the patients were admitted to the ICU. Conclusion(s): Barotrauma in COVID-19 can pose a serious risk factor leading to mortality. Also, using CPAP was linked to a higher risk of barotrauma.Copyright © 2021 Muslim OT et al.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for airway emergencies

Objectives: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is well established in cardiorespiratory failure. Here we report the use of ECMO in an airway emergency to provide respiratory support. Method(s): Informed consent was obtained from patient at the time of admission. Result(s): A 48-year-old with COVID-19 requiring venovenous ECMO (VVECMO) for 32 days and tracheostomy for 47 days had developed tracheal stenosis three months after tracheostomy removal, and undergone tracheal resection and reconstruction. He presented two weeks later with acute dyspnea, bloody drainage and a bulge in his neck with coughing. A computerized tomography (CT) of the cervical spine and chest showed dehiscence of the tracheal wound and a gap in the trachea. He was managed with High Flow Nasal Canula and supported on VVECMO support using 25 Fr. right femoral drainage cannula and 23 Fr. left IJ return cannula. A covered stent was placed, neck wound was irrigated and debrided. Patient was decannulated after 10 days on ECMO. Future therapeutic considerations include mediastinal tracheostomy, aortic homograft interposition of the disrupted segment of trachea with stent placement and permanent self-expandable stent with internal silicone stent. Conclusion(s): ECMO is increasingly used in complex thoracic surgery as well as in the perioperative period as salvage support. One of the areas where it has shown promising results is traumatic main bronchial rupture, airway tumor leading to severe airway stenosis, and other complex airway problems. The ease of cannulation, the technological advances and growing confidence in the management of ECMO patients are the main reasons for the expansion of ECMO use beyond conventional indications. The case described above is an example of the use of ECMO in the perioperative management of impending respiratory failure due to airway obstruction or disconnection. (Figure Presented).

Secondary Infections in Patients with Extremely Severe COVID-19 During ECMO Therapy.

Up to 70% of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 need respiratory support, up to 10% need high-flow oxygen therapy, non-invasive and invasive ventilation. However, standard methods of respiratory support are ineffective in 0.4-0.5% of patients. In case of potentially reversible critical refractory respiratory failure that patients may require ECMO. Management of patients with extremely severe COVID-19 associates with numerous clinical challenges, including critical illness, multiple organ dysfunction, blood coagulation disorders, requiring prolonged ICU stay and care, use of multiple pharmacotherapies including immunosuppressive drugs. Pharmacological suppression of immunity is associated with a significant increase in the risk of secondary bacterial and fungal infections. Currently, data on epidemiology of secondary infections in patients with COVID-19 undergoing ECMO is limited. Aim. To study the prevalence and etiology of secondary infections associated with positive blood cultures in patients with extremely severe COVID-19 requiring ECMO. Materials and methods. A single-center retrospective non-interventional epidemiological study including 125 patients with extremely severe COVID-19 treated with ECMO in April 2020 to December 2021. Results. Out of 700 blood culture tests performed in 125 patients during the study, 250 tests were positive confirming bacteremia/fungemia. Isolated pathogens varied depending on the duration of ECMO: gram-positive bacteria (primarily coagulase-negative staphylococci) dominated from the initiation of ECMO support;increased duration of ECMO associated with an increasing the proportion of pathogens common in ICU (Klebsiella pneumoniae and/or Acinetobacter baumannii with extensively drug resistant and pan-drug resistant phenotypes, and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium). When ECMO lasted more than 7-14 days, opportunistic pathogens (Candida species, Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, Providencia stuartii, non-diphtheria corynebacteria, Burkholderia species and others) prevailed as etiological agents. Conclusion. Longer duration of ECMO resulted in increasing the rates of infectious complications. In patients undergoing ECMO for more than 14 days, the microbiological landscape becomes extremely diverse, which hampers choosing an empirical antimicrobial therapy. Since potential pathogens causing secondary infections in patients during ECMO are difficult to predict, rapid identification of rare opportunistic pathogens and their sensitivity profile, followed by targeted administration of antimicrobials, seems most beneficial.Copyright © 2023, V.A. Negovsky Research Institute of General Reanimatology. All rights reserved.

Barotrauma during Noninvasive Respiratory Support in COVID-19 Pneumonia Outside ICU: The Ancillary COVIMIX-2 Study.

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive respiratory support (NIRS) has been extensively used during the COVID-19 surge for patients with acute respiratory failure. However, little data are available about barotrauma during NIRS in patients treated outside the intensive care unit (ICU) setting. METHODS: COVIMIX-2 was an ancillary analysis of the previous COVIMIX study, a large multicenter observational work investigating the frequencies of barotrauma (i.e., pneumothorax and pneumomediastinum) in adult patients with COVID-19 interstitial pneumonia. Only patients treated with NIRS outside the ICU were considered. Baseline characteristics, clinical and radiological disease severity, type of ventilatory support used, blood tests and mortality were recorded. RESULTS: In all, 179 patients were included, 60 of them with barotrauma. They were older and had lower BMI than controls (p < 0.001 and p = 0.045, respectively). Cases had higher respiratory rates and lower PaO2/FiO2 (p = 0.009 and p < 0.001). The frequency of barotrauma was 0.3% [0.1-1.3%], with older age being a risk factor for barotrauma (OR 1.06, p = 0.015). Alveolar-arterial gradient (A-a) DO2 was protective against barotrauma (OR 0.92 [0.87-0.99], p = 0.026). Barotrauma required active treatment, with drainage, in only a minority of cases. The type of NIRS was not explicitly related to the development of barotrauma. Still, an escalation of respiratory support from conventional oxygen therapy, high flow nasal cannula to noninvasive respiratory mask was predictive for in-hospital death (OR 15.51, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: COVIMIX-2 showed a low frequency for barotrauma, around 0.3%. The type of NIRS used seems not to increase this risk. Patients with barotrauma were older, with more severe systemic disease, and showed increased mortality.

COVID-19-associated lung weakness (CALW): Systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess mortality and different clinical factors derived from the development of atraumatic pneumothorax (PNX) and/or pneumomediastinum (PNMD) in critically ill patients as a consequence of COVID-19-associated lung weakness (CALW). DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis. SETTING: Intensive Care Unit (ICU). PARTICIPANTS: Original research evaluating patients, with or without the need for protective invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), with a diagnosis of COVID-19, who developed atraumatic PNX or PNMD on admission or during hospital stay. INTERVENTIONS: Data of interest were obtained from each article and analyzed and assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The risk of the variables of interest was assessed with data derived from studies including patients who developed atraumatic PNX or PNMD. MAIN VARIABLES OF INTEREST: Mortality, mean ICU stay and mean PaO2/FiO2 at diagnosis. RESULTS: Information was collected from 12 longitudinal studies. Data from a total of 4901 patients were included in the meta-analysis. A total of 1629 patients had an episode of atraumatic PNX and 253 patients had an episode of atraumatic PNMD. Despite the finding of significantly strong associations, the great heterogeneity between studies implies that the interpretation of results should be made with caution. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality among COVID-19 patients was higher in those who developed atraumatic PNX and/or PNMD compared to those who did not. The mean PaO2/FiO2 index was lower in patients who developed atraumatic PNX and/or PNMD. We propose grouping these cases under the term COVID-19-associated lung weakness (CALW).

Impact of High-Flow Nasal Cannula Use in Subjects With COVID-19 ARDS at High Altitudes: Clinical Presentation and Prognostic Factors.

BACKGROUND: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) reduces the need for intubation in adult subject with acute respiratory failure. Changes in hypobaric hypoxemia have not been studied for subject with an HFNC in ICUs at altitudes > 2,600 m above sea level. In this study, we investigated the efficacy of HFNC treatment in subjects with COVID-19 at high altitudes. We hypothesized that progressive hypoxemia and the increase in breathing frequency associated with COVID-19 in high altitudes affect the success of HFNC therapy and may also influence the performance of the traditionally used predictors of success and failure. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of subjects >18 y with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19-induced ARDS requiring HFNC who were admitted to the ICU. Subjects were followed up during the 28 d of HFNC treatment or until failure. RESULTS: One hundred and eight subjects were enrolled. At admission to the ICU, FIO2 delivery between 0.5-0.8 (odds ratio 0.38 [95% CI 0.17-0.84]) was associated with a better response to HFNC therapy than oxygen delivery on admission between 0.8-1.0 (odds ratio 3.58 [95% CI 1.56-8.22]). This relationship continued during follow-ups at 2, 6, 12, and 24 h, with a progressive increase in the risk of failure (odds ratio 24 h 13.99 [95% CI 4.32-45.26]). A new cutoff for the ratio of oxygen saturation (ROX) index (ROX ≥ 4.88) after 24 h of HFNC administration was demonstrated to be the best predictor of success (odds ratio 11.0 [95% CI 3.3-47.0]). CONCLUSIONS: High-altitude subjects treated with HFNC for COVID-19 showed a high risk of respiratory failure and progressive hypoxemia when FIO2 requirements were > 0.8 after 24 h of treatment. In these subjects, personalized management should include continuous monitoring of individual clinical conditions (such as oxygenation indices, with cutoffs adapted to those corresponding to high-altitude cities).

The COVID-19 Driving Force: How It Shaped the Evidence of Non-Invasive Respiratory Support.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of non-invasive respiratory support (NIRS) became crucial in treating patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. Despite the fear of viral aerosolization, non-invasive respiratory support has gained attention as a way to alleviate ICU overcrowding and reduce the risks associated with intubation. The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an unprecedented increased demand for research, resulting in numerous publications on observational studies, clinical trials, reviews, and meta-analyses in the past three years. This comprehensive narrative overview describes the physiological rationale, pre-COVID-19 evidence, and results of observational studies and randomized control trials regarding the use of high-flow nasal oxygen, non-invasive mechanical ventilation, and continuous positive airway pressure in adult patients with COVID-19 and associated acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. The review also highlights the significance of guidelines and recommendations provided by international societies and the need for further well-designed research to determine the optimal use of NIRS in treating this population.

High Flow Nasal Oxygen in frail COVID-19 patients hospitalized in intermediate care units and non-eligible to invasive mechanical ventilation

Background in COVID-19 patients, older age (sixty or older), comorbidities, and frailty are associated with a higher risk for mortality and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) failure. It therefore seems appropriate to suggest limitations of care to older and vulnerable patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and a poor expected outcome, who would not benefit from invasive treatment. HFNO (high flow nasal oxygen) is a non-invasive respiratory support device already used in de novo acute respiratory failure. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the survival of patients treated with HFNO outside the ICU (intensive care unit) for a severe COVID-19 pneumonia, otherwise presenting limitations of care making them non-eligible for IMV. Secondary objectives were the description of our cohort and the identification of prognostic factors for HFNO failure. Methods we conducted a retrospective cohort study. We included all patients with limitations of care making them non-eligible for IMV and treated with HFNO for a severe COVID-19 pneumonia, hospitalized in a COVID-19 unit of the pulmonology department of Lyon Sud University Hospital, France, from March 2020 to March 2021. Primary outcome was the description of the vital status at day-30 after HFNO initiation, using the WHO (World Health Organization) 7-points ordinal scale. Results fifty-six patients were included. Median age was 83 years [76.3-87.0], mean duration for HFNO was 7.5 days, 53% had a CFS score (Clinical Frailty Scale) >4. At day-30, 73% of patients were deceased, one patient (2%) was undergoing HFNO, 9% of patients were discharged from hospital. HFNO failure occurred in 66% of patients. Clinical signs of respiratory failure before HFNO initiation (respiratory rate >30/min, retractions, and abdominal paradoxical breathing pattern) were associated with mortality (p=.001). Conclusions we suggest that HFNO is an option in non-ICU skilled units for older and frail patients with a severe COVID-19 pneumonia, otherwise non-suitable for intensive care and mechanical ventilation. Observation of clinical signs of respiratory failure before HFNO initiation was associated with mortality.Background

Diagnosis and treatment of a patient with pneumoconiosis and tuberculosis complicated with severe COVID-19

The removal and defense mechanisms of the respiratory system of patients with pneumoconiosis are impaired. Once patients with pneumoconiosis and other underlying lung diseases are infected with novel coronavirus, they are likely to progress to severe cases with COVID-19, a tough condition with a high mortality and poor prognosis. Herein we presented a case of pneumoconiosis and tuberculosis complicated with severe COVID-19. Active administration of anti-viral, anti-infection, phlegm-removing, anti-asthmatic, and high-flow oxygen therapies did not alleviate the patient's acute respiratory distress syndrome symptoms. Then tracheal intubation, ventilator assisted breathing, and lung protective ventilation were given but did not effectively treat the patient's respiratory failure. Finally, the patient died clinically despite use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).Copyright © 2021, Shanghai Municipal Center for Disease Control and Prevention. All rights reserved.

Indications for Intubation in COVID-19

Intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation are often unavoidable in most severe cases of COVID-19 pneumonia;however, deciding the optimum timing and best practices of intubation is challenging. The decision to proceed with intubation should be based on an integrated patient evaluation and not limited to the assessment of the severity of hypoxemia alone. Intubation is a maneuver exposing the operator to a high risk of contamination, therefore adequate personal protection equipment is mandatory. Benefits of intubation over noninvasive respiratory support include reduction or suppression of the respiratory drive, reduction of the basal metabolism and allowance of maintaining protective mechanical ventilation. On the other hand, risks are related to the need for sedation, the presence of an artificial airway and exposure to mechanical ventilation, which may result in overlapping ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia and ventilator-induced lung injury. Balancing between risks and benefits of intubation in this context is challenging and the optimum timing of intubation remains largely an open question. This chapter discusses the clinical, technical, and safety aspects that deserve to be considered when considering intubation in patients with severe COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure. © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022.

Respiratory Therapy and Proning

The novel SARS coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is responsible for COVID-19 which primarily affects the respiratory tract, particularly the lungs, of infected patients. The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a large number of hospitalized patients with respiratory failure reaching the level of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). ARDS requires prolonged respiratory care. Critically ill patients can frequently progress to decompensation and death. Respiratory therapy is therefore important in response to such a health crisis as COVID-19, to improve patient care and ultimately prevent mortality. Modern respiratory care science has shown that proning can improve oxygenation of patients with ARDS. Planning and preparation for a viral respiratory health crisis require a strategy and system to prone patients effectively and safely. In this two-part chapter, perspectives are presented on respiratory therapy and proning during the pandemic. The experience of respiratory therapy at the SBH Health System during the COVID-19 crisis surge in Spring 2020 presents rich lessons to be learned about health crisis planning, preparation, and management with respect to respiratory therapy. © SBH Health System 2022.

Noninvasive Mechanical Ventilation and Conventional Oxygen Therapy

COVID-19 pneumonia often presents with severely impaired oxygenation. In patients presenting with hypoxemic acute respiratory failure (ARF), one of the most important goals is to avoid invasive mechanical ventilation. Therefore, in this chapter, we will review the current evidence and rationale for using noninvasive oxygenation and ventilation strategies in patients presenting with COVID-19 and hypoxemic ARF. © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022.

Long-term outcome of COVID-19 patients treated with helmet noninvasive ventilation vs. high-flow nasal oxygen: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Long-term outcomes of patients treated with helmet noninvasive ventilation (NIV) are unknown: safety concerns regarding the risk of patient self-inflicted lung injury and delayed intubation exist when NIV is applied in hypoxemic patients. We assessed the 6-month outcome of patients who received helmet NIV or high-flow nasal oxygen for COVID-19 hypoxemic respiratory failure. METHODS: In this prespecified analysis of a randomized trial of helmet NIV versus high-flow nasal oxygen (HENIVOT), clinical status, physical performance (6-min-walking-test and 30-s chair stand test), respiratory function and quality of life (EuroQoL five dimensions five levels questionnaire, EuroQoL VAS, SF36 and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for the DSM) were evaluated 6 months after the enrollment. RESULTS: Among 80 patients who were alive, 71 (89%) completed the follow-up: 35 had received helmet NIV, 36 high-flow oxygen. There was no inter-group difference in any item concerning vital signs (N = 4), physical performance (N = 18), respiratory function (N = 27), quality of life (N = 21) and laboratory tests (N = 15). Arthralgia was significantly lower in the helmet group (16% vs. 55%, p = 0.002). Fifty-two percent of patients in helmet group vs. 63% of patients in high-flow group had diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide < 80% of predicted (p = 0.44); 13% vs. 22% had forced vital capacity < 80% of predicted (p = 0.51). Both groups reported similar degree of pain (p = 0.81) and anxiety (p = 0.81) at the EQ-5D-5L test; the EQ-VAS score was similar in the two groups (p = 0.27). Compared to patients who successfully avoided invasive mechanical ventilation (54/71, 76%), intubated patients (17/71, 24%) had significantly worse pulmonary function (median diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide 66% [Interquartile range: 47-77] of predicted vs. 80% [71-88], p = 0.005) and decreased quality of life (EQ-VAS: 70 [53-70] vs. 80 [70-83], p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with COVID-19 hypoxemic respiratory failure, treatment with helmet NIV or high-flow oxygen yielded similar quality of life and functional outcome at 6 months. The need for invasive mechanical ventilation was associated with worse outcomes. These data indicate that helmet NIV, as applied in the HENIVOT trial, can be safely used in hypoxemic patients. Trial registration Registered on clinicaltrials.gov NCT04502576 on August 6, 2020.

Comparison of the efficacy and comfort of high-flow nasal cannula with different initial flow settings in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has been proven effective in improving patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF), but a discussion of its use for initial flow settings still need to be provided. We aimed to compare the effectiveness and comfort evaluation of HFNC with different initial flow settings in patients with AHRF. METHODS: Studies published by October 10, 2022, were searched exhaustively in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) database. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed with STATA 17.0 and R software (version 4.2.1). A Bayesian framework was applied for this NMA. Comparisons of competing models based on the deviance information criterion (DIC) were used to select the best model for NMA. The primary outcome is the intubation at day 28. Secondary outcomes included short-term and long-term mortality, comfort score, length of ICU or hospital stay, and 24-h PaO2/FiO2. RESULTS: This NMA included 23 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 5774 patients. With NIV as the control, the HFNC_high group was significantly associated with lower intubation rates (odds ratio [OR] 0.72 95% credible interval [CrI] 0.56 to 0.93; moderate quality evidence) and short-term mortality (OR 0.81 95% CrI 0.69 to 0.96; moderate quality evidence). Using HFNC_Moderate (Mod) group (mean difference [MD] - 1.98 95% CrI -3.98 to 0.01; very low quality evidence) as a comparator, the HFNC_Low group had a slight advantage in comfort scores but no statistically significant difference. Of all possible interventions, the HFNC_High group had the highest probability of being the best in reducing intubation rates (73.04%), short-term (82.74%) and long-term mortality (67.08%). While surface under the cumulative ranking curve value (SUCRA) indicated that the HFNC_Low group had the highest probability of being the best in terms of comfort scores. CONCLUSIONS: The high initial flow settings (50-60 L/min) performed better in decreasing the occurrence of intubation and mortality, albeit with poor comfort scores. Treatment of HFNC for AHRF patients ought to be initiated from moderate flow rates (30-40 L/min), and individualized flow settings can make HFNC more sensible in clinical practice.

Respiratory Care in Children with COVID-19.

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is causing significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. The common presentations in children include involvement of respiratory system leading to pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome, as well as multiorgan dysfunction syndrome and multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C). Pediatric COVID-19 is a milder disease as compared with the adults. Also, there is rise in MIS-C cases which is a hyperinflammatory condition temporally associated with SARS-CoV-2. Since respiratory system is predominantly involved, few of these critically ill children often require respiratory support which can range from simple oxygen delivery devices, high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC), noninvasive ventilation (NIV), invasive mechanical ventilation, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Most of the oxygen delivery devices and respiratory interventions generate aerosols and pose risk of transmission of virus to health care providers (HCPs). The use of HFNC and NIV should be limited to children with mild respiratory distress preferably in negative pressure rooms and with adequate personal protective equipment (PPE). However, there should be low thresholds for intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation in the event of clinical deterioration while on any respiratory support. The principle of providing respiratory support requires special droplet and air-borne precautions to limit exposure or transmission of virus to HCPs and at the same time ensuring safety of the patient.