scholarly journals Protecting Postextubation Respiratory Failure and Reintubation by High-Flow Nasal Cannula Compared to Low-Flow Oxygen System: Single Center Retrospective Study and Literature Review

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-70
Author(s):  
Minhyeok Lee ◽  
Ji Hye Kim ◽  
In Beom Jeong ◽  
Ji Woong Son ◽  
Moon Jun Na ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Respiratory Failure ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Nasal Cannula ◽  
Low Flow ◽  
Single Center ◽  
High Flow Nasal Cannula ◽  
Oxygen System

scholarly journals High-flow nasal cannula for respiratory failure in adult patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 275-285
Author(s):  
SeungYong Park
Keyword(s):  
Respiratory Failure ◽  
Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Nasal Cannula ◽  
Low Flow ◽  
Chronic Obstructive ◽  
High Flow Nasal Cannula ◽  
Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure ◽  
Non Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Fraction Of Inspired Oxygen

The high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has been recently used in several clinical settings for oxygenation in adults. In particular, the advantages of HFNC compared with low-flow oxygen systems or non-invasive ventilation include enhanced comfort, increased humidification of secretions to facilitate expectoration, washout of nasopharyngeal dead space to improve the efficiency of ventilation, provision of a small positive end-inspiratory pressure effect, and fixed and rapid delivery of an accurate fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) by minimizing the entrainment of room air. HFNC has been successfully used in critically ill patients with several conditions, such as hypoxemic respiratory failure, hypercapneic respiratory failure (exacerbation of chronic obstructive lung disease), post-extubation respiratory failure, pre-intubation oxygenation, and others. However, the indications are not absolute, and much of the proven benefit remains subjective and physiologic. This review discusses the practical application and clinical uses of HFNC in adults, including its unique respiratory physiologic effects, device settings, and clinical indications.

scholarly journals High Flow Nasal Cannula as Support in Immunocompromised Patients with Acute Respiratory Failure: A Retrospective Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-67
Author(s):  
Claudia Giugliano-Jaramillo ◽  
Josefina León ◽  
Cristobal Enriquez ◽  
Juan E. Keymer ◽  
Rodrigo Pérez-Araos
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Respiratory Failure ◽  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Acute Respiratory Failure ◽  
Work Of Breathing ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Nasal Cannula ◽  
Respiratory Support ◽  
Immunocompromised Patients ◽  
High Flow Nasal Cannula

Introduction: High Flow Nasal Cannula (HFNC) is a novel technique for respiratory support that improves oxygenation. In some patients, it may reduce the work of breathing. In immunocompromised patients with Acute Respiratory Failure (ARF), Non-Invasive Ventilation (NIV) is the main support recommended strategy, since invasive mechanical ventilation could increase mortality rates. NIV used for more than 48 hours may be associated with increased in-hospital mortality and hospital length of stay. Therefore HFNC seems like a respiratory support alternative. Objective: To describe clinical outcomes of immunocompromised patients with ARF HFNC-supported. Methods: Retrospective study in patients admitted with ARF and HFNC-supported. 25 adult patients were included, 21 pharmacologically and 4 non- pharmacologically immunosuppressed. Median age of the patients was 64 [60-76] years, APACHE II 15 [11-19], and PaO2:FiO2 218 [165-248]. Demographic information, origin of immunosuppression, Respiratory Rate (RR), Heart Rate (HR), Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP), oxygen saturation (SpO2) and PaO2:FiO2 ratio were extracted from clinical records of our HFNC local protocol. Data acquisition was performed before and after the first 24 hours of connection. In addition, the need for greater ventilatory support after HFNC, orotracheal intubation, in-hospital mortality and 90 days out-patients’ mortality was recorded. Results: Mean RR before the connection was 25±22 breaths/min and 22±4 breaths/min after the first 24 hours of HFNC use (95% CI; p=0.02). HR mean before connection to HFNC was 96±22 beats/min, and after, it was 86±15 beats/min (95%CI; p=0.008). Previous mean MAP was 86±15 mmHg, and after HFNC, it was 80±12 mmHg (95%CI; p=0.09); mean SpO2 after was 93±5% and before it was 95±4% (95% CI; p=0.13); and previous PaO2:FiO2 mean was 219±66, and after it was 324±110 (95%CI; p=0.52). In-hospital mortality was 28% and 90 days out-patients’ mortality was 32%. Conclusion: HFNC in immunosuppressed ARF subjects significantly decreases HR and RR, being apparently an effective alternative to decrease work of breathing. In-hospital mortality in ARF immunosuppressed patients was high even though respiratory support was used. Better studies are needed to define the role of HFNC-support in ARF.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document