High flow nasal oxygen for acute type two respiratory failure: a systematic review [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]

Background: Acute type two respiratory failure (AT2RF) is characterized by high carbon dioxide levels (PaCO2 >6kPa). Non-invasive ventilation (NIV), the current standard of care, has a high failure rate. High flow nasal therapy (HFNT) has potential additional benefits such as CO2 clearance, the a...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Asem Abdulaziz Alnajada, Bronagh Blackwood, Abdulmajeed Mobrad, Adeel Akhtar, Ivan Pavlov, Murali Shyamsundar
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: F1000 Research Ltd 2021-09-01
Series:F1000Research
Online Access:https://f1000research.com/articles/10-482/v2
id doaj-dd9f621a5ad84958a4ae550c9a15f921
record_format Article
spelling doaj-dd9f621a5ad84958a4ae550c9a15f9212021-09-27T15:03:37ZengF1000 Research LtdF1000Research2046-14022021-09-011010.12688/f1000research.52885.277259High flow nasal oxygen for acute type two respiratory failure: a systematic review [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]Asem Abdulaziz Alnajada0Bronagh Blackwood1Abdulmajeed Mobrad2Adeel Akhtar3Ivan Pavlov4Murali Shyamsundar5Wellcome-Wolfson Institute For Experimental Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UKWellcome-Wolfson Institute For Experimental Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UKPrince Sultan college for emergency medical services, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi ArabiaEmergency department, Royal Victoria Hospital, Belfast, Belfast, UKEmergency department, Hôpital de Verdun, Montréal, CanadaWellcome-Wolfson Institute For Experimental Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UKBackground: Acute type two respiratory failure (AT2RF) is characterized by high carbon dioxide levels (PaCO2 >6kPa). Non-invasive ventilation (NIV), the current standard of care, has a high failure rate. High flow nasal therapy (HFNT) has potential additional benefits such as CO2 clearance, the ability to communicate and comfort. The primary aim of this systematic review is to determine whether HFNT in AT2RF improves 1) PaCO2, 2) clinical and patient-centred outcomes and 3) to assess potential harms. Methods: We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL  (January 1999-January 2021). Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies comparing HFNT with low flow nasal oxygen (LFO) or NIV were included. Two authors independently assessed studies for eligibility, data extraction and risk of bias. We used Cochrane risk of bias tool for RCTs and Ottawa-Newcastle scale for cohort studies. Results: From 727 publications reviewed, four RCTs and one cohort study (n=425) were included. In three trials of HFNT vs NIV, comparing PaCO2 (kPa) at last follow-up time point, there was a significant reduction at four hours (1 RCT; HFNT median 6.7, IQR 5.6 – 7.7 vs NIV median 7.6, IQR 6.3 – 9.3) and no significant difference at  24-hours or five days. Comparing HFNT with LFO, there was no significant difference at 30-minutes. There was no difference in intubation or mortality. Conclusions: This review identified a small number of studies with low to very low certainty of evidence. A reduction of PaCO2 at an early time point of four hours post-intervention was demonstrated in one small RCT. Significant limitations of the included studies were lack of adequately powered outcomes and clinically relevant time-points and small sample size. Accordingly, systematic review cannot recommend the use of HFNT as the initial management strategy for AT2RF and trials adequately powered to detect clinical and patient-relevant outcomes are urgently warranted.https://f1000research.com/articles/10-482/v2
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Asem Abdulaziz Alnajada
Bronagh Blackwood
Abdulmajeed Mobrad
Adeel Akhtar
Ivan Pavlov
Murali Shyamsundar
spellingShingle Asem Abdulaziz Alnajada
Bronagh Blackwood
Abdulmajeed Mobrad
Adeel Akhtar
Ivan Pavlov
Murali Shyamsundar
High flow nasal oxygen for acute type two respiratory failure: a systematic review [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
F1000Research
author_facet Asem Abdulaziz Alnajada
Bronagh Blackwood
Abdulmajeed Mobrad
Adeel Akhtar
Ivan Pavlov
Murali Shyamsundar
author_sort Asem Abdulaziz Alnajada
title High flow nasal oxygen for acute type two respiratory failure: a systematic review [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
title_short High flow nasal oxygen for acute type two respiratory failure: a systematic review [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
title_full High flow nasal oxygen for acute type two respiratory failure: a systematic review [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
title_fullStr High flow nasal oxygen for acute type two respiratory failure: a systematic review [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
title_full_unstemmed High flow nasal oxygen for acute type two respiratory failure: a systematic review [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
title_sort high flow nasal oxygen for acute type two respiratory failure: a systematic review [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
publisher F1000 Research Ltd
series F1000Research
issn 2046-1402
publishDate 2021-09-01
description Background: Acute type two respiratory failure (AT2RF) is characterized by high carbon dioxide levels (PaCO2 >6kPa). Non-invasive ventilation (NIV), the current standard of care, has a high failure rate. High flow nasal therapy (HFNT) has potential additional benefits such as CO2 clearance, the ability to communicate and comfort. The primary aim of this systematic review is to determine whether HFNT in AT2RF improves 1) PaCO2, 2) clinical and patient-centred outcomes and 3) to assess potential harms. Methods: We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL  (January 1999-January 2021). Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies comparing HFNT with low flow nasal oxygen (LFO) or NIV were included. Two authors independently assessed studies for eligibility, data extraction and risk of bias. We used Cochrane risk of bias tool for RCTs and Ottawa-Newcastle scale for cohort studies. Results: From 727 publications reviewed, four RCTs and one cohort study (n=425) were included. In three trials of HFNT vs NIV, comparing PaCO2 (kPa) at last follow-up time point, there was a significant reduction at four hours (1 RCT; HFNT median 6.7, IQR 5.6 – 7.7 vs NIV median 7.6, IQR 6.3 – 9.3) and no significant difference at  24-hours or five days. Comparing HFNT with LFO, there was no significant difference at 30-minutes. There was no difference in intubation or mortality. Conclusions: This review identified a small number of studies with low to very low certainty of evidence. A reduction of PaCO2 at an early time point of four hours post-intervention was demonstrated in one small RCT. Significant limitations of the included studies were lack of adequately powered outcomes and clinically relevant time-points and small sample size. Accordingly, systematic review cannot recommend the use of HFNT as the initial management strategy for AT2RF and trials adequately powered to detect clinical and patient-relevant outcomes are urgently warranted.
url https://f1000research.com/articles/10-482/v2
work_keys_str_mv AT asemabdulazizalnajada highflownasaloxygenforacutetypetworespiratoryfailureasystematicreviewversion2peerreview2approved
AT bronaghblackwood highflownasaloxygenforacutetypetworespiratoryfailureasystematicreviewversion2peerreview2approved
AT abdulmajeedmobrad highflownasaloxygenforacutetypetworespiratoryfailureasystematicreviewversion2peerreview2approved
AT adeelakhtar highflownasaloxygenforacutetypetworespiratoryfailureasystematicreviewversion2peerreview2approved
AT ivanpavlov highflownasaloxygenforacutetypetworespiratoryfailureasystematicreviewversion2peerreview2approved
AT muralishyamsundar highflownasaloxygenforacutetypetworespiratoryfailureasystematicreviewversion2peerreview2approved
_version_ 1716866746268254208