Efficacy of non-invasive and invasive respiratory management strategies in adult patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Critical Care

Hiromu Okano¹  Tomoyuki Masuyama²  Masaaki Sakuraya³  Shunsuke Kimata⁴  Satoshi Hokari⁵ 

[1] Department of Critical and Emergency Medicine, National Hospital Organization Yokohama Medical, Yokohama, Japan;Department of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, Misato Kenwa Hospital, Saitama, Japan;Department of Emergency and Intensive Care Medicine, JA Hiroshima General Hospital, Jigozen 1-3-3, 738-8503, Hatsukaichi, Hiroshima, Japan;Department of Preventive Services, School of Public Health, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan;Department of Respiratory Medicine and Infectious Diseases, Niigata University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Niigata, Japan;

关键词: Acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure;    Continuous positive airway pressure;    High-flow nasal oxygen;    Network meta-analysis;    Non-invasive ventilation;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s13054-021-03835-8

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundAlthough non-invasive respiratory management strategies have been implemented to avoid intubation, patients with de novo acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure (AHRF) are high risk of treatment failure. In the previous meta-analyses, the effect of non-invasive ventilation was not evaluated according to ventilation modes in those patients. Furthermore, no meta-analyses comparing non-invasive respiratory management strategies with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) have been reported. We performed a network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of non-invasive ventilation according to ventilation modes with high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO), standard oxygen therapy (SOT), and IMV in adult patients with AHRF.MethodsThe Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Ichushi databases were searched. Studies including adults with AHRF and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing two different respiratory management strategies (continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), pressure support ventilation (PSV), HFNO, SOT, or IMV) were reviewed.ResultsWe included 25 RCTs (3,302 participants: 27 comparisons). Using SOT as the reference, CPAP (risk ratio [RR] 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.31–0.95; very low certainty) was associated significantly with a lower risk of mortality. Compared with SOT, PSV (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.62–1.06; low certainty) and HFNO (RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.65–1.25; very low certainty) were not associated with a significantly lower risk of mortality. Compared with IMV, no non-invasive respiratory management was associated with a significantly lower risk of mortality, although all certainties of evidence were very low. The probability of being best in reducing short-term mortality among all possible interventions was higher for CPAP, followed by PSV and HFNO; IMV and SOT were tied for the worst (surface under the cumulative ranking curve value: 93.2, 65.0, 44.1, 23.9, and 23.9, respectively).ConclusionsWhen performing non-invasive ventilation among patients with de novo AHRF, it is important to avoid excessive tidal volume and lung injury. Although pressure support is needed for some of these patients, it should be applied with caution because this may lead to excessive tidal volume and lung injury.Trial registration protocols.io (Protocol integer ID 49375, April 23, 2021). https://doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.buf7ntrn.

【 授权许可】

CC BY