Non-invasive ventilation in patients with an altered level of consciousness. A clinical review and practical insights

Non-invasive ventilation has gained an increasingly pivotal role in the treatment of acute hypoxemic and/or hypercapnic respira-tory failure and offers multiple advantages over invasive mechanical ventilation. Some of these advantages include the preserva-tion of airway defense mechanisms, a reduced need for sedation, and an avoidance of complications related to endotracheal intubation.Despite its advantages, non-invasive ventilation has some contraindications that include, among them, severe encephalopathy. In this review article, the rationale, evidence, and drawbacks of the use of noninvasive ventilation in the context of hypercapnic and non-hypercapnic patients with an altered level of consciousness are analyzed

Machine Learning and Antibiotic Management

Machine learning and cluster analysis applied to the clinical setting of an intensive care unit can be a valuable aid for clinical management, especially with the increasing complexity of clinical monitoring. Providing a method to measure clinical experience, a proxy for that automatic gestalt evaluation that an experienced clinician sometimes effortlessly, but often only after long, hard consideration and consultation with colleagues, relies upon for decision making, is what we wanted to achieve with the application of machine learning to antibiotic therapy and clinical monitoring in the present work. This is a single-center retrospective analysis proposing methods for evaluation of vitals and antimicrobial therapy in intensive care patients. For each patient included in the present study, duration of antibiotic therapy, consecutive days of treatment and type and combination of antimicrobial agents have been assessed and considered as single unique daily record for analysis. Each parameter, composing a record was normalized using a fuzzy logic approach and assigned to five descriptive categories (fuzzy domain sub-sets ranging from “very low” to “very high”). Clustering of these normalized therapy records was performed, and each patient/day was considered to be a pertaining cluster. The same methodology was used for hourly bed-side monitoring. Changes in patient conditions (monitoring) can lead to a shift of clusters. This can provide an additional tool for assessing progress of complex patients. We used Fuzzy logic normalization to descriptive categories of parameters as a form nearer to human language than raw numbers

Machine Learning and Antibiotic Management

Machine learning and cluster analysis applied to the clinical setting of an intensive care unit can be a valuable aid for clinical management, especially with the increasing complexity of clinical monitoring. Providing a method to measure clinical experience, a proxy for that automatic gestalt evaluation that an experienced clinician sometimes effortlessly, but often only after long, hard consideration and consultation with colleagues, relies upon for decision making, is what we wanted to achieve with the application of machine learning to antibiotic therapy and clinical monitoring in the present work. This is a single-center retrospective analysis proposing methods for evaluation of vitals and antimicrobial therapy in intensive care patients. For each patient included in the present study, duration of antibiotic therapy, consecutive days of treatment and type and combination of antimicrobial agents have been assessed and considered as single unique daily record for analysis. Each parameter, composing a record was normalized using a fuzzy logic approach and assigned to five descriptive categories (fuzzy domain sub-sets ranging from "very low" to "very high"). Clustering of these normalized therapy records was performed, and each patient/day was considered to be a pertaining cluster. The same methodology was used for hourly bed-side monitoring. Changes in patient conditions (monitoring) can lead to a shift of clusters. This can provide an additional tool for assessing progress of complex patients. We used Fuzzy logic normalization to descriptive categories of parameters as a form nearer to human language than raw numbers

High-Flow Nasal Oxygen Therapy in Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: Concise Review on Technology and Initial Methodology.

High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNCOT) system consists of an air/oxygen supply system capable of delivering up to 100% humidified and heated oxygen at a flow rate of up to 80 L/min. The system includes a blender, active humidifier, single heated tube, and nasal cannula. HFNCOT has many physiological advantages compared with other standard oxygen therapies, such as anatomical dead space washout, more constant fraction of inspired oxygen, positive end-expiratory (PEEP) effect, supplement of adequate humidification and maintenance of muco-ciliary function. HFNCOT is mostly used for hypoxemic acute respiratory failure, although it also has other indications. HFNCOT is a common choice of physicians as its technology makes it more silent and comfortable. Though HFNCOT is used in many clinical settings, there is a lack of publications addressing devices and initial settings. We present a review on HFNCOT, with focus on device and application methodology

Long-term outcome of COVID-19 patients treated with helmet noninvasive ventilation vs. high-flow nasal oxygen: a randomized trial

Abstract Background Long-term outcomes of patients treated with helmet noninvasive ventilation (NIV) are unknown: safety concerns regarding the risk of patient self-inflicted lung injury and delayed intubation exist when NIV is applied in hypoxemic patients. We assessed the 6-month outcome of patients who received helmet NIV or high-flow nasal oxygen for COVID-19 hypoxemic respiratory failure. Methods In this prespecified analysis of a randomized trial of helmet NIV versus high-flow nasal oxygen (HENIVOT), clinical status, physical performance (6-min-walking-test and 30-s chair stand test), respiratory function and quality of life (EuroQoL five dimensions five levels questionnaire, EuroQoL VAS, SF36 and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for the DSM) were evaluated 6 months after the enrollment. Results Among 80 patients who were alive, 71 (89%) completed the follow-up: 35 had received helmet NIV, 36 high-flow oxygen. There was no inter-group difference in any item concerning vital signs (N = 4), physical performance (N = 18), respiratory function (N = 27), quality of life (N = 21) and laboratory tests (N = 15). Arthralgia was significantly lower in the helmet group (16% vs. 55%, p = 0.002). Fifty-two percent of patients in helmet group vs. 63% of patients in high-flow group had diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide < 80% of predicted (p = 0.44); 13% vs. 22% had forced vital capacity < 80% of predicted (p = 0.51). Both groups reported similar degree of pain (p = 0.81) and anxiety (p = 0.81) at the EQ-5D-5L test; the EQ-VAS score was similar in the two groups (p = 0.27). Compared to patients who successfully avoided invasive mechanical ventilation (54/71, 76%), intubated patients (17/71, 24%) had significantly worse pulmonary function (median diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide 66% [Interquartile range: 47–77] of predicted vs. 80% [71–88], p = 0.005) and decreased quality of life (EQ-VAS: 70 [53–70] vs. 80 [70–83], p = 0.01). Conclusions In patients with COVID-19 hypoxemic respiratory failure, treatment with helmet NIV or high-flow oxygen yielded similar quality of life and functional outcome at 6 months. The need for invasive mechanical ventilation was associated with worse outcomes. These data indicate that helmet NIV, as applied in the HENIVOT trial, can be safely used in hypoxemic patients. Trial registration Registered on clinicaltrials.gov NCT04502576 on August 6, 202

Wentylacja nieinwazyjna u pacjentów w zmienionym stanie świadomości. Przegląd kliniczny i uwagi praktyczne

Wentylacja nieinwazyjna odgrywa coraz większą rolę w leczeniu ostrej hipoksemicznej lub hiperkapnicznej niewydolności oddychania i ma wiele zalet w porównaniu z inwazyjną wentylacją mechaniczną. Do zalet tych zalicza się zachowanie mechanizmów obronnych dróg oddechowych, zmniejszoną potrzebę sedacji i zmniejszenie ryzyka powikłań związanych z intubacją dotchawiczą. Mimo niewątpliwych walorów wentylacji nieinwazyjnej istnieją również pewne przeciwwskazania do stosowania tej metody, jak na przykład ciężka encefalopatia. W niniejszym artykule przeglądowym przeanalizowano podstawy teoretyczne, dowody naukowe i wady stosowania wentylacji nieinwazyjnej u pacjentów z hiperkapnią lub bez hiperkapni, znajdujących się w stanie zaburzonej świadomości

Non-invasive ventilation in patients with an altered level of consciousness. A clinical review and practical insights

Non-invasive ventilation has gained an increasingly pivotal role in the treatment of acute hypoxemic and/or hypercapnic respiratory failure and offers multiple advantages over invasive mechanical ventilation. Some of these advantages include the preservation of airway defense mechanisms, a reduced need for sedation, and an avoidance of complications related to endotracheal intubation

Effect of Helmet Noninvasive Ventilation vs High-Flow Nasal Oxygen on Days Free of Respiratory Support in Patients With COVID-19 and Moderate to Severe Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: The HENIVOT Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance: High-flow nasal oxygen is recommended as initial treatment for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and is widely applied in patients with COVID-19. Objective: To assess whether helmet noninvasive ventilation can increase the days free of respiratory support in patients with COVID-19 compared with high-flow nasal oxygen alone. Design, setting, and participants: Multicenter randomized clinical trial in 4 intensive care units (ICUs) in Italy between October and December 2020, end of follow-up February 11, 2021, including 109 patients with COVID-19 and moderate to severe hypoxemic respiratory failure (ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen 64200). Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned to receive continuous treatment with helmet noninvasive ventilation (positive end-expiratory pressure, 10-12 cm H2O; pressure support, 10-12 cm H2O) for at least 48 hours eventually followed by high-flow nasal oxygen (n = 54) or high-flow oxygen alone (60 L/min) (n = 55). Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was the number of days free of respiratory support within 28 days after enrollment. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of patients who required endotracheal intubation within 28 days from study enrollment, the number of days free of invasive mechanical ventilation at day 28, the number of days free of invasive mechanical ventilation at day 60, in-ICU mortality, in-hospital mortality, 28-day mortality, 60-day mortality, ICU length of stay, and hospital length of stay. Results: Among 110 patients who were randomized, 109 (99%) completed the trial (median age, 65 years [interquartile range {IQR}, 55-70]; 21 women [19%]). The median days free of respiratory support within 28 days after randomization were 20 (IQR, 0-25) in the helmet group and 18 (IQR, 0-22) in the high-flow nasal oxygen group, a difference that was not statistically significant (mean difference, 2 days [95% CI, -2 to 6]; P = .26). Of 9 prespecified secondary outcomes reported, 7 showed no significant difference. The rate of endotracheal intubation was significantly lower in the helmet group than in the high-flow nasal oxygen group (30% vs 51%; difference, -21% [95% CI, -38% to -3%]; P = .03). The median number of days free of invasive mechanical ventilation within 28 days was significantly higher in the helmet group than in the high-flow nasal oxygen group (28 [IQR, 13-28] vs 25 [IQR 4-28]; mean difference, 3 days [95% CI, 0-7]; P = .04). The rate of in-hospital mortality was 24% in the helmet group and 25% in the high-flow nasal oxygen group (absolute difference, -1% [95% CI, -17% to 15%]; P &gt; .99). Conclusions and relevance: Among patients with COVID-19 and moderate to severe hypoxemia, treatment with helmet noninvasive ventilation, compared with high-flow nasal oxygen, resulted in no significant difference in the number of days free of respiratory support within 28 days. Further research is warranted to determine effects on other outcomes, including the need for endotracheal intubation

Postoperative continuous positive airway pressure to prevent pneumonia, re-intubation, and death after major abdominal surgery (PRISM): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

BackgroundRespiratory complications are an important cause of postoperative morbidity. We aimed to investigate whether continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) administered immediately after major abdominal surgery could prevent postoperative morbidity.MethodsPRISM was an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial done at 70 hospitals across six countries. Patients aged 50 years or older who were undergoing elective major open abdominal surgery were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive CPAP within 4 h of the end of surgery or usual postoperative care. Patients were randomly assigned using a computer-generated minimisation algorithm with inbuilt concealment. The primary outcome was a composite of pneumonia, endotracheal re-intubation, or death within 30 days after randomisation, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received CPAP. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN56012545.FindingsBetween Feb 8, 2016, and Nov 11, 2019, 4806 patients were randomly assigned (2405 to the CPAP group and 2401 to the usual care group), of whom 4793 were included in the primary analysis (2396 in the CPAP group and 2397 in the usual care group). 195 (8·1%) of 2396 patients in the CPAP group and 197 (8·2%) of 2397 patients in the usual care group met the composite primary outcome (adjusted odds ratio 1·01 [95% CI 0·81–1·24]; p=0·95). 200 (8·9%) of 2241 patients in the CPAP group had adverse events. The most common adverse events were claustrophobia (78 [3·5%] of 2241 patients), oronasal dryness (43 [1·9%]), excessive air leak (36 [1·6%]), vomiting (26 [1·2%]), and pain (24 [1·1%]). There were two serious adverse events: one patient had significant hearing loss and one patient had obstruction of their venous catheter caused by a CPAP hood, which resulted in transient haemodynamic instability.InterpretationIn this large clinical effectiveness trial, CPAP did not reduce the incidence of pneumonia, endotracheal re-intubation, or death after major abdominal surgery. Although CPAP has an important role in the treatment of respiratory failure after surgery, routine use of prophylactic post-operative CPAP is not recommended.<br/