Surfactant therapy using vibrating-mesh nebulizers in adults with COVID-19-induced ARDS: A case series.

Coronavirus adult respiratory distress syndrome, characterized by decreased surfactant due to lysis of type II pneumocytes and hyaline membrane formation, contributes to severe hypoxemia. The administration of surfactant via high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) may positively affect lung structure and function in this context. In this study, we report on five clinical cases, encompassing patients aged 40-60 years of both sexes, who tested positive for coronavirus disease 2019 via real-time polymerase chain reaction and exhibited significant pulmonary compromise with elevated inflammatory biomarkers. These patients were treated with aerosol therapy using surfactant delivered through vibrating-mesh nebulizers alongside HFNC. Of these patients, four demonstrated positive responses to the treatment, suggesting that aerosol therapy with surfactant through vibrating-mesh nebulizers could be a viable rescue therapy in adults receiving HFNC oxygen therapy for hypoxemic respiratory failure caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Unfortunately, one patient had a negative outcome and succumbed. The findings from these cases indicate that the use of aerosol therapy with vibrating-mesh nebulizers as rescue therapy might offer an alternative approach for managing adults with hypoxemic respiratory failure due to SARS-CoV-2, as evidenced by the positive outcomes in four out of the five cases presented.

Cost Analysis of High-Flow Oxygen Therapy Compared with Conventional Oxygen Therapy in Severe COVID-19 in Colombia: Data from a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Background: A randomized clinical trial (HiFlo-COVID-19 Trial) showed that among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with high-flow oxygen therapy (HFOT) significantly reduced the need for invasive mechanical ventilation support and time for clinical recovery compared with conventional oxygen therapy (COT). However, the cost of this strategy is unknown. Objective: We examined total cost of HFOT treatment compared with COT in real-world setting. Methods: We conducted a post-trial-based cost analysis from the perspective of a managed competition healthcare system, using actual records of billed costs. Cost categories include general ward, intensive care unit, procedures, imaging, laboratories, medications, supplies, and others. Results: A total of 188 participants (mean age 60, 33% female) were included. Average costs (and standard deviation) in the HFOT group were USD $7992 (7394) and in the COT group USD $ 10,190 (9402). Differences, however, did not reach statistical significance (P=0.093). However, resource use was always less costly for the HNFO group, with an overall percentage decrease of 27%. Two categories make up 72% of all savings: medications (41%) and intensive care unit (31%). Conclusion: For patients in ICU with severe COVID-19 the cost of treatment with HFOT as compared to COT is likely to be cost-saving due to less use of medications and length of stay in ICU.

Oxigenoterapia de alto flujo y ventilación no invasiva en pacientes extubados por COVID-19 y riesgo de reintubación / High-flow oxygen therapy and non-invasive ventilation in extubated patients with COVID-19 and risk of reintubation

RESUMEN Introducción: La oxigenoterapia de alto flujo (OAF) y la ventilación no invasiva (VNI) son sistemas no invasivos que se administran post-extubación en pacientes COVID-19 para evitar la reintubación. Sin embargo, la evidencia sobre la elección de alguno de estos dispositivos no está muy clara. El objetivo fue determinar si el grupo que recibió OAF comparado con el grupo que recibió VNI se asocia a menor riesgo de reintubación en adultos con destete difícil y extubados por COVID-19. Material y métodos: Estudio cohorte retrospectivo en 206 registros de pacientes en destete difícil de ventilación mecánica en la Unidad de Cuidados Intensivos (UCI). El resultado primario fue reintubación en pacientes que fracasaron con OAF o VNI post-extubación y los resultados secundarios fueron estancia hospitalaria en UCI y mortalidad a los 90 días. Resultados: Doscientos seis pacientes cumplieron los criterios de inclusión, 102 pacientes en el grupo OAF y 104 pacientes en el grupo VNI. Durante el seguimiento de 72 horas, la tasa de reintubación en el grupo OAF fue mayor [n=24 (64,9%)] comparado con el grupo VNI [n=13 (35,1%)], mostrando en el análisis de Kaplan-Meier diferencias significativas (Log-Rank-Test p=0,005). La regresión de COX mostró mayor riesgo de reintubación en el grupo de OAF frente a VNI (HR 2,74; IC95% 1,42-5,68; p=0,007). No hubo diferencias en los días de hospitalización UCI (p=0,913) ni en mortalidad a los 90 días (Log-Rank-Test p=0,49). Conclusión: Este estudio observacional retrospectivo sugirió que la OAF frente al VNI se asoció a mayor riesgo de reintubación, pero no a mortalidad a los 90 días.

ABSTRACT Introduction: High flow oxygen therapy (HFO) and non-invasive ventilation (NIV) are non-invasive systems that are administered post-extubation in COVID-19 patients to avoid reintubation. However, the evidence on the choice of any of these devices is not very clear. The objective was to determine if the group that received OAF compared to the group that received NIV is associated with a lower risk of reintubation in adults with difficult weaning and extubated due to COVID-19. Material and methods: Retrospective cohort study in 206 records of patients in difficult weaning from mechanical ventilation in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). The primary outcome was reintubation in patients who failed HFO or post-extubation NIV, and the secondary outcomes were ICU hospital stay and 90-day mortality. Results: Two hundred and six patients met the inclusion criteria, 102 patients in the OAF group and 104 patients in the NIV group. During the 72-h follow-up, the reintubation rate in the HFO group was higher [n=24 (64,9%)] compared to the NIV group [n=13 (35,1%)], showing in the analysis of Kaplan-Meier significant differences (Log-Rank-Test p=0,005). COX regression showed a higher risk of reintubation in the HFO group compared to NIV (HR 2,74; 95%CI 1,42-5,68; p=0,007). There were no differences in ICU hospitalization days (p=0,913) or in 90-day mortality (Log-Rank-Test p=0,49). Conclusion: This retrospective observational study suggested that HFO versus NIV was associated with a higher risk of reintubation, but not with 90-day mortality.

Análisis de la experiencia del uso de cánula nasal de alto flujo como terapéutica en neumonía por SARS-CoV-2 / Analysis of the experience of the use of high-flow nasal cannula as therapeutics in SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia

Introducción: Durante la pandemia por SARS-CoV-2, la cánula nasal de alto flujo (CNAF) se usó como soporte en espera de Unidad de terapia intensiva (UTI) o como alternativa a la ventilación invasiva. Objetivos: Primario: Determinar si la cánula nasal de alto flujo evita la intubación oro traqueal. Secundarios: Analizar predictores de éxito al inicio de la cánula nasal de alto flujo y análisis descriptivo de la muestra. Materiales y métodos: Estudio observacional descriptivo retrospectivo. Se incluyeron pacientes mayores de 16 años positivos para SARS-CoV-2, atendidos en guardia y unidad de terapia intensiva, que utilizaron cánula nasal de alto flujo entre octubre de 2020 y marzo 2021. Se recolectaron datos en planillas individuales, analizadas por un profesional externo. Resultados: Se incluyeron en el trabajo 72 pacientes (de 16 a 88 años), 20 mujeres y 52 hombres. El 50 % de la muestra evitó la intubación orotraqueal. El IROX inicio grupo "éxito" vs. grupo "fracaso", p = 0,006. Comparación Irox 12 h grupo "éxito" vs. grupo "fracaso" p < 0,001. Comparación "tiempo desde ingreso a inicio de cánula nasal de alto flujo" grupo "éxito" vs. grupo "fracaso", p = 0,133. Comparación "Delta IROX" grupo "éxito" vs grupo "fracaso" p = 0,092. Conclusión: Se evitó la intubación orotraqueal en el 50 % de los casos. El IROX de inicio y el IROX a las 12 h del uso de cánula nasal de alto flujo fue estadísticamente significativo, lo que es un buen predictor del éxito en esta población. La fecha de inicio de síntomas y el uso de cánula nasal de alto flujo y el delta del IROX durante las pri meras 12 h no fue estadísticamente significativo para el éxito de la terapia. Estos datos son una herramienta útil con el objeto de generar protocolos de selección de pacientes para esta patología.

Introduction: During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, the high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) was used as support while waiting for the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) or as an alternative to invasive ventilation. The objective of this work is the description and analysis of the use of CNAF in our population. Objectives: Primary: Determine if HFNC prevents orotracheal intubation. Secondary: Analyze predictors of success at the start of CNAF and a descriptive analysis of the sample Materials and method: Retrospective descriptive observational study. Patients over 16 years of age positive for SARS-CoV-2, treated in Guard and ICU were included. who used CNAF between October 2020 and March 2021 Data was collected in individual forms, analyzed by an external professional. Results: The study included 72 patients (16 to 88 years old), 20 women and 52 men; 50 % of the sample avoided orotracheal intubation. Start IROX, group "success" vs. group "failure" p = 0.006. Comparison Irox.12 h group "success" vs. group "failure" p < 0.001. Comparison "Time from admission to start of CNAF" group "success" vs. group "failure" p = 0.133. Comparison "Delta IROX" group "success" vs. group "failure" p = 0.092. Conclusion: HFNC avoided orotracheal intubation in the 50 % of the cases. The initial IROX and the IROX 12 hours after the use of HFNC were statistically significant, which is a good predictor of success in this population. The date of onset of symptoms and the use of FNAF and IROX delta during the first 12 hours were not statistically significant for the success of the therapy. These data are a useful tool for generating patient selection protocols for this pathology.

Performance of Invasive Mode in Different Heated Humidification Systems With High-Flow Nasal Cannula.

BACKGROUND: Oxygen therapy via high-flow nasal cannula generates physiologic changes that impact ventilatory variables of patients. However, we know that there are detrimental effects on airway mucosa related to inhalation of gases. The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance in terms of absolute humidity, relative humidity, and temperature of different brands of heated humidifiers and circuits in the invasive mode during the use of high-flow oxygen therapy in flows between 30 and 100 L/min. METHODS: A prospective observational study conducted at the Sanatorio Anchorena equipment analysis laboratory; September 5 to October 20, 2019. RESULTS: A statistically significant interaction was found among the programmed flows and the different combinations of devices and circuits for the delivery of absolute humidity (P < .001). An effect of flow on delivered absolute humidity was found, regardless of the equipment and circuit combination (P < .001). However, in the invasive mode, the combination of the Fisher&Paykel MR850 heated humidifier with the Medtronic-Dar circuit, the Intersurgical circuit, and the AquaVENT circuit always reached or achieved absolute humidity values > 33 mg/L, even at flows up to 100 L/min. The combination of the Flexicare FL9000 heated humidifier with the Fisher&Paykel RT202 circuit, the Fisher&Paykel Evaqua 2 circuit, the Flexicare circuit, the AquaVENT circuit, and the GGM circuit achieved similar results. The mean (SD) of absolute humidity delivered in the invasive mode (36.2 ± 5.9 mg/L) was higher compared with the noninvasive mode (26.8 ± 7.2 mg/L) (P < .001), regardless of circuit and programmed flows. CONCLUSIONS: When heated humidifiers were used in the invasive mode for high-flow oxygen therapy, absolute humidity depended not only on the heated humidifiers and the combination of circuits but also on the programmed flow, especially at flows > 50 L/min. Moreover, the heated humidifiers exhibited different behaviors, in some cases inefficient, in delivering adequate humidification. However, some equipment improved performance when set to the invasive mode.

High-Flow Oxygen Therapy Application in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients With Acute Hypercapnic Respiratory Failure: A Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of high-flow oxygen implementation on the respiratory rate as a first-line ventilation support in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure. DESIGN: Multicenter, prospective, analytic observational case series study. SETTING: Five ICUs in Argentina, between August 2018 and September 2019. PATIENTS: Patients greater than or equal to 18 years old with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, who had been admitted to the ICU with a diagnosis of hypercapnic acute respiratory failure, were entered in the study. INTERVENTIONS: High-flow oxygen therapy through nasal cannula delivered using high-velocity nasal insufflation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Forty patients were studied, 62.5% severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. After the first hour of high-flow nasal cannula implementation, there was a significant decrease of respiratory rate compared with baseline values, with a 27% decline (29 vs 21 breaths/min; p < 0.001). Furthermore, a significant reduction of Paco2 (57 vs 52 mm Hg [7.6 vs 6.9 kPa]; p < 0.001) was observed. The high-flow nasal cannula application failed in 18% patients. In this group, the respiratory rate, pH, and Paco2 showed no significant change during the first hour in these patients. CONCLUSIONS: High-flow oxygen therapy through nasal cannula delivered using high-velocity nasal insufflation was an effective tool for reducing respiratory rate in these chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure. Early determination and subsequent monitoring of clinical and blood gas parameters may help predict the outcome.

Performance of Different Active Humidification Systems in High-Flow Oxygen Therapy.

BACKGROUND: We sought to evaluate the performance in terms of absolute humidity (AH), relative humidity (RH), and temperature of different heated humidifiers (HH) and circuits that are commonly used to deliver high-flow oxygen therapy in conventional ranges (30-60 L/min) and unconventional ranges (70-100 L/min). METHODS: In this prospective, observational study, an electronic thermohygrometer was used to obtain the required measurements. A mechanical ventilator was used as a source for high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy. For active humidification, the following equipment was used: a HH with standard disposable water trap circuit, 3 servo-controlled HH, and 7 circuits with a heated wire. Data on environmental conditions (ie, temperature, RH, AH) were collected from the laboratory during each measurement; the temperature, RH, and AH resulting from the application of 8 flows (30-100 L/min) were also recorded. Variables were compared with analysis of variance for repeated measurements with Tukey post hoc tests. A value of P < .05 was assumed to be significant. RESULTS: During the study, a statistically significant difference was found in the average AH for each flow for the different devices (P < .005). The highest AH values were recorded with the Fisher & Paykel MR850 and the Medtronic-DAR circuit (AH = 40.8 mg/L with flow of 50 L/min, P < .005), and the lowest AH values were recorded with the Flexicare FL9000 HH and the Flexicare circuit (AH = 11.4 mg/L with 100 L/min flow, P < .005). For flows > 50 L/min, the best performance for all flows in terms of AH was found with the Fisher & Paykel MR850 HH, regardless of the circuit used. CONCLUSIONS: During oxygen therapy with very high gas flows, HH devices behave differently and in many cases are inefficient in delivering adequate humidification, even at conventional flows. Caution is therefore recommended when selecting the device and flow settings for the implementation of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy.

Oxigenoterapia de alto flujo: Experiencia en pediatría en un hospital general / High-flow oxygen therapy: Experience in pediatrics at a general hospital

Introducción: La Oxigenoterapia de Alto Flujo (OAF) es una técnica de soporte respiratorio no invasiva, que ofrece un flujo de aire y oxígeno, caliente y humidificado, por encima del flujo pico inspiratorio del paciente, a través de una cánula nasal. En este artículo se presenta la experiencia con OAF en una sala de pediatría de mediana y baja complejidad para el tratamiento de bronquiolitis/ infección respiratoria aguda baja (IRAB). Materiales y métodos: Se diseñó un protocolo para la implementación de OAF. Criterios de inclusión: Pacientes cursando bronquiolitis/ IRAB con: Score de Tal modificado ≥6, Sat O2 < 92% y/o mala mecánica ventilatoria, a pesar de recibir más de 2 lt/ min de O2 por cánula nasal ó FiO2 >40%. Criterios de exclusión, pCO2 ≥55 mmHg; pH: < 7,20; Apneas ≥20 segundos; Glasgow ≤10; Peso >15 kg. Inestabilidad hemodinámica; Alteraciones craneofaciales. Resultados: En el periodo 2017- 2018 se internaron 441 pacientes con infección respiratoria aguda baja. Se administró OAF a 54 pacientes (12%). La mediana de edad mediana 7,4 meses (r: 27 días-36 meses). Los pacientes ingresados no presentaban comorbilidades asociadas. El 22,2% (12/54) fueron trasladados a UTIP (2,7% del total de los internados). El 64.8% de los pacientes que permanecieron en sala de internación, mostró mejoría en FC y FR a las 4 hs. Por el contrario, en el 75% de los pacientes que requirieron UTIP no se evidenció mejoría en estos parámetros. Conclusiones: La OAF es una alternativa terapéutica que podría disminuir el ingreso a UTIP en pacientes con dificultad respiratoria moderada. En nuestra experiencia resultó fácil de implementar, sin efectos adversos graves (AU)

Introduction: High-flow oxygen (HFO) therapy is a non-invasive oxygen support technique that provides hot and humidified air and oxygen flow above the peak inspiratory flow of the patient through a nasal cannula. In this study we present our experience with HFO on a intermediate and low complexity ward for the treatment of bronchiolitis/acute lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI). Material and methods: A protocol for the implementation of HFO was designed. Inclusion criteria: Patients with bronchiolitis/ALRI with: Modified Tal score ≥6, Sat O2 < 92%, and/or poor ventilatory mechanism, in spite of receiving more than 2 L/ min O2 by nasal cannula or FiO2 >40%. Exclusion criteria: pCO2 ≥55 mmHg; pH: < 7.20; Apnea ≥20 seconds; Glasgow score ≤10; Peso >15 kg. Hemodynamic instability; Craniofacial abnormalities. Results: During 2017- 2018, 441 patients were admitted with LRTI. HFO was administered to 54 patients (12%). Median age was 7.4 months (r: 27 days-36 months). The patients that were included in the study did not have associated morbidities. Overall, 22.2% (12/54) were transferred to the PICU (2.7% of all hospitalized patients). Of the patients who remained on the ward, 64.8% improved FC and FR after 4 hours. On the other hand, in 75% of the patients that required PICU admission these parameters did not improve. Conclusions: HFO is a therapeutic option to decrease PICU admission of patients with moderate respiratory difficulties. The protocol was easy to implement and was not associated with severe adverse effects (AU)