Effect of High-Flow Oxygen on Exercise Performance in COPD Patients. Randomized Trial

Background: High-flow oxygen therapy (HFOT) provides oxygen-enriched, humidified, and heated air at high flow rates via nasal cannula. It could be an alternative to low-flow oxygen therapy (LFOT) which is commonly used by patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) during exercise training. Research Question: We evaluated the hypothesis that HFOT improves exercise endurance in COPD patients compared to LFOT. Methods: Patients with stable COPD, FEV1 40–80% predicted, resting pulse oximetry (SpO2) ≥92%, performed two constant-load cycling exercise tests to exhaustion at 75% of maximal work rate on two different days, using LFOT (3 L/min) and HFOT (60 L/min, FiO2 0.45) in randomized order according to a crossover design. Primary outcome was exercise endurance time, further outcomes were SpO2, breath rate and dyspnea. Results: In 79 randomized patients, mean ± SD age 58 ± 9 y, FEV1 63 ± 9% predicted, GOLD grades 2-3, resting PaO2 9.4 ± 1.0 kPa, intention-to-treat analysis revealed an endurance time of 688 ± 463 s with LFOT and 773 ± 471 s with HFOT, mean difference 85 s (95% CI: 7 to 164, P = 0.034), relative increase of 13% (95% CI: 1 to 28). At isotime, patients had lower respiratory rate and higher SpO2 with HFOT. At end-exercise, SpO2 was higher by 2% (95% CI: 2 to 2), and Borg CR10 dyspnea scores were lower by 0.8 points (95% CI: 0.3 to 1.2) compared to LFOT. Interpretation: In mildly hypoxemic patients with COPD, HFOT improved endurance time in association with higher arterial oxygen saturation, reduced respiratory rate and less dyspnea compared to LFOT. Therefore, HFOT is promising for enhancing exercise performance in COPD. Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT03955770

Validation of Noninvasive Assessment of Pulmonary Gas Exchange in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease during Initial Exposure to High Altitude

Investigation of pulmonary gas exchange efficacy usually requires arterial blood gas analysis (aBGA) to determine arterial partial pressure of oxygen (mPaO2) and compute the Riley alveolar-to-arterial oxygen difference (A-aDO2); that is a demanding and invasive procedure. A noninvasive approach (AGM100), allowing the calculation of PaO2 (cPaO2) derived from pulse oximetry (SpO2), has been developed, but this has not been validated in a large cohort of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. Our aim was to conduct a validation study of the AG100 in hypoxemic moderate-to-severe COPD. Concurrent measurements of cPaO2 (AGM100) and mPaO2 (EPOC, portable aBGA device) were performed in 131 moderate-to-severe COPD patients (mean ±SD FEV1: 60 ± 10% of predicted value) and low-altitude residents, becoming hypoxemic (i.e., SpO2 < 94%) during a short stay at 3100 m (Too-Ashu, Kyrgyzstan). Agreements between cPaO2 (AGM100) and mPaO2 (EPOC) and between the O2-deficit (calculated as the difference between end-tidal pressure of O2 and cPaO2 by the AGM100) and Riley A-aDO2 were assessed. Mean bias (±SD) between cPaO2 and mPaO2 was 2.0 ± 4.6 mmHg (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.2 to 2.8 mmHg) with 95% limits of agreement (LoA): −7.1 to 11.1 mmHg. In multivariable analysis, larger body mass index (p = 0.046), an increase in SpO2 (p < 0.001), and an increase in PaCO2-PETCO2 difference (p < 0.001) were associated with imprecision (i.e., the discrepancy between cPaO2 and mPaO2). The positive predictive value of cPaO2 to detect severe hypoxemia (i.e., PaO2 ≤ 55 mmHg) was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.87 to 0.98) with a positive likelihood ratio of 3.77 (95% CI: 1.71 to 8.33). The mean bias between O2-deficit and A-aDO2 was 6.2 ± 5.5 mmHg (95% CI: 5.3 to 7.2 mmHg; 95%LoA: −4.5 to 17.0 mmHg). AGM100 provided an accurate estimate of PaO2 in hypoxemic patients with COPD, but the precision for individual values was modest. This device is promising for noninvasive assessment of pulmonary gas exchange efficacy in COPD patients