Factors associated with mechanical ventilation in SARS-CoV-2 patients treated with high-flow nasal cannula oxygen and outcomes
| Autor: | Martin Martinot, Henry Lessire, Lounis Belilita, Xavier Leroux, Charles Bouterra, Victor Gerber, Pierre Rerat, Antonio Alvarez, Maud Schock, Olivier Augereau |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2021 |
| Předmět: |
Adult
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) medicine.medical_treatment Short Communication high‐flow nasal cannula Short Communications mechanical ventilation medicine.disease_cause intensive care unit SARS‐CoV‐2 law.invention law COVID‐19 Virology Medicine Intubation Cannula Humans Respiratory system Retrospective Studies Mechanical ventilation business.industry SARS-CoV-2 COVID-19 Intensive care unit Respiration Artificial Oxygen Infectious Diseases Shock (circulatory) Anesthesia medicine.symptom business Complication Respiratory Insufficiency Nasal cannula |
| Zdroj: | Journal of Medical Virology |
| ISSN: | 1096-9071 |
| Popis: | Five percent of patients infected with SARS‐CoV‐2 require advanced respiratory support. The high‐flow nasal cannula oxygenotherapy (HFNCO) appears to be effective and safe to reduce the need for mechanical ventilation. However, the factors associated with HFNCO failure as well as the outcomes of patients receiving this noninvasive respiratory strategy remain unclear. Thus, we performed this study to determine factors leading to intubation of SARS‐CoV‐2 patients treated with HFNCO and patients’ outcomes. We retrospectively analyzed the medical charts of patients admitted in our ICU center for acute respiratory failure due to SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and who initially benefited from HFNCO, between September 1, 2020, and March 1, 2021. We included all adults patients who received HFNCO and compared two groups: those treated with HFNCO alone and those who failed HFNCO. Patients treated with HFNCO and secondarily limited to the use of mechanical ventilation were excluded from the analysis. Sixty‐nine patients were included, 33 were treated with HFNCO alone and 36 failed HFNCO. We found more patients with shock in the HFNCO failure group (p = 0.001). The mean IGSII score was higher in the HFNCO failure group (p Highlights The use of HFNCO avoided the need for intubation in 47.8% of the cases in our study.Patients with HFNCO failure have a lower minimal PaO2/FiO2, more shock, an higher IGSII score and a longer length of stay in ICU.We found greater mortality at six weeks in the HFNCO failure group.We found an high rate of complications following the intubation. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Plný text