Various studies have been performed to examine the effect of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) in immunocompromised patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF). However, the results were inconsistent. Thus, we conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of HFNC oxygen therapy in immunocompromised patients with ARF versus conventional oxygen therapy and noninvasive ventilation (NIV).
METHODS:
Relevant studies published prior to May 11, 2019, were systematically searched. The primary outcome was intubation rate; secondary outcomes were mortality (ICU mortality, in-hospital mortality, and 90-d mortality) and ICU-acquired infections. Data were pooled using the random effects model.
RESULTS:
Of 832 identified studies, 8 were eligible for inclusion in our analysis (N = 2,167 subjects). HFNC was associated with lower intubation rates compared to conventional oxygen therapy (risk ratio [RR] 0.89, 95% CI 0.79–1.00, P = .040), but we found no significant difference in the rate between HFNC and NIV (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.46–1.19, P = .22). We also found that HFNC did not increase the risk of ICU-acquired infections (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.63–1.18, P = .35). However, in comparison to other noninvasive therapies, HFNC exhibited no differences in ICU mortality (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.58–1.17, P = .28), in-hospital mortality (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.74–1.15, P = .48), or 90-d mortality (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.81–1.18, P = .82).
CONCLUSIONS:
Our results suggest that HFNC may be a feasible alternative to NIV, with lower intubation rates and no increased risk for ICU-acquired infections compared to standard oxygen therapy. However, HFNC did not appear to reduce mortality in immunocompromised subjects with ARF compared with other noninvasive therapies. Further high-quality randomized controlled trials should be performed to confirm these findings.
AzoulayE, PickkersP, SoaresM, PernerA, RelloJ, BauerPR, et al. Acute hypoxemic respiratory failure in immunocompromised patients: the Efraim multinational prospective cohort study. Intensive Care Med, 2017; 43(12):1808–1819.
2.
AzoulayE, MokartD, PeneF, LambertJ, KouatchetA, MayauxJ, et al. Outcomes of critically ill patients with hematologic malignancies: prospective multicenter data from France and Belgium–a groupe de recherche respiratoire en reanimation onco-hematologique study. J Clin Oncol, 2013; 31(22):2810–2818.
3.
EstebanA, Frutos-VivarF, MurielA, FergusonND, PenuelasO, AbrairaV, et al. Evolution of mortality over time in patients receiving mechanical ventilation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2013; 188(2):220–230.
4.
AzoulayE, LemialeV, MokartD, PeneF, KouatchetA, PerezP, et al. Acute respiratory distress syndrome in patients with malignancies. Intensive Care Med, 2014; 40(8):1106–1114.
5.
AzevedoL, CarusoP, SilvaU, TorellyAP, SilvaE, RezendeE, et al. Outcomes for patients with cancer admitted to the ICU requiring ventilatory support: results from a prospective multicenter study. Chest, 2014; 146(2):257–266.
6.
RochwergB, BrochardL, ElliottMW, HessD, HillNS, NavaS, et al. Official ERS/ATS clinical practice guidelines: noninvasive ventilation for acute respiratory failure. Eur Respir J, 2017; 50(2).
7.
FaverioP, De GiacomiF, SardellaL, FiorentinoG, CaroneM, SalernoF, et al. Management of acute respiratory failure in interstitial lung diseases: overview and clinical insights. BMC Pulm Med, 2018; 18.
8.
BrambillaAM, AlibertiS, PrinaE, NicoliF, Del FornoM, NavaS, et al. Helmet CPAP vs. oxygen therapy in severe hypoxemic respiratory failure due to pneumonia. Intensive Care Med, 2014; 40(7):942–949.
9.
CortegianiA, MadottoF, GregorettiC, BellaniG, LaffeyJG, PhamT, et al. Immunocompromised patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: secondary analysis of the LUNG SAFE database. Crit Care, 2018; 22(1):157.
10.
LemialeV, MokartD, Resche-RigonM, PeneF, MayauxJ, FaucherE, et al. Effect of noninvasive ventilation vs oxygen therapy on mortality among immunocompromised patients with acute respiratory failure: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA, 2015; 314(16):1711–1719.
11.
NishimuraM. High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy in adults: physiological benefits, indication, clinical benefits, and adverse effects. Respir Care, 2016; 61(4):529–541.
12.
HelvizY, EinavS. A systematic review of the high-flow nasal cannula for adult patients. Crit Care, 2018; 22(1):71.
13.
FratJP, ThilleAW, MercatA, GiraultC, RagotS, PerbetS, et al. High-flow oxygen through nasal cannula in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. N Engl J Med, 2015; 372(23):2185–2196.
14.
MauriT, TurriniC, EroniaN, GrasselliG, VoltaCA, BellaniG, et al. Physiologic effects of high-flow nasal cannula in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2017; 195(9):1207–1215.
15.
SpoletiniG, AlotaibiM, BlasiF, HillNS. Heated humidified high-flow nasal oxygen in adults: mechanisms of action and clinical implications. Chest, 2015; 148(1):253–261.
16.
De JongA, CalvetL, LemialeV, DemouleA, MokartD, DarmonM, et al. The challenge of avoiding intubation in immunocompromised patients with acute respiratory failure. Expert Rev Respir Med, 2018; 12(10):867–880.
17.
FratJP, CoudroyR, MarjanovicN, ThilleAW. High-flow nasal oxygen therapy and noninvasive ventilation in the management of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. Ann Transl Med, 2017; 5(14):297.
18.
SklarMC, MohammedA, Orchanian-CheffA, DelSL, MehtaS, MunshiL. The impact of high-flow nasal oxygen in the immunocompromised critically ill: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Respir Care, 2018; 63(12):1555–1566.
19.
HuangHB, PengJM, WengL, LiuGY, BD. High-flow oxygen therapy in immunocompromised patients with acute respiratory failure: a review and meta-analysis. J Crit Care, 2018; 43:300–305.
20.
CortegianiA, CrimiC, SanfilippoF, NotoA, Di FalcoD, GrasselliG, et al. High flow nasal therapy in immunocompromised patients with acute respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Crit Care, 2019; 50:250–256.
21.
AzoulayE, LemialeV, MokartD, NseirS, ArgaudL, PeneF, et al. Effect of high-flow nasal oxygen vs standard oxygen on 28-day mortality in immunocompromised patients with acute respiratory failure: the HIGH randomized clinical trial. JAMA, 2018; 320(20):2099–2107.
22.
RochwergB, GrantonD, WangDX, HelvizY, EinavS, FratJP, et al. High flow nasal cannula compared with conventional oxygen therapy for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med, 2019; 45(5):563–572.
23.
HigginsJP, AltmanDG, GotzschePC, JuniP, MoherD, OxmanAD, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ, 2011; 343:d5928.
24.
StangA. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol, 2010; 25(9):603–605.
TuG, HeH, YinK, JuM, ZhengY, ZhuD, et al. High-flow nasal cannula versus noninvasive ventilation for treatment of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure in renal transplant recipients. Transplant Proc, 2017; 49(6):1325–1330.
27.
LemialeV, Resche-RigonM, MokartD, PèneF, ArgaudL, MayauxJ, et al. High-flow nasal cannula oxygenation in immunocompromised patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a groupe de recherche respiratoire en réanimation onco-hématologique study. Crit Care Med, 2017; 45(3):e274–e280.
28.
CoudroyR, JametA, PetuaP, RobertR, FratJP, ThilleAW. High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy versus noninvasive ventilation in immunocompromised patients with acute respiratory failure: an observational cohort study. Ann Intensive Care, 2016; 6(1):45.
29.
FratJP, RagotS, GiraultC, PerbetS, PratG, BoulainT, et al. Effect of non-invasive oxygenation strategies in immunocompromised patients with severe acute respiratory failure: a post-hoc analysis of a randomised trial. Lancet Respir Med, 2016; 4(8):646–652.
30.
LemialeV, MokartD, MayauxJ, LambertJ, RabbatA, DemouleA, et al. The effects of a 2-h trial of high-flow oxygen by nasal cannula versus Venturi mask in immunocompromised patients with hypoxemic acute respiratory failure: a multicenter randomized trial. Crit Care, 2015; 19:380.
31.
RocaO, de AciluMG, CaraltB, SacanellJ, MasclansJR. Humidified high flow nasal cannula supportive therapy improves outcomes in lung transplant recipients readmitted to the intensive care unit because of acute respiratory failure. Transplantation, 2015; 99(5):1092–1098.
32.
AzoulayE, SchellongowskiP, DarmonM, BauerPR, BenoitD, DepuydtP, et al. The Intensive Care Medicine research agenda on critically ill oncology and hematology patients. Intensive Care Med, 2017; 43(9):1366–1382.
33.
BrochardL, SlutskyA, PesentiA. Mechanical ventilation to minimize progression of lung injury in acute respiratory failure. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2017; 195(4):438–442.
34.
NiYN, LuoJ, YuH, LiuD, NiZ, ChengJ, et al. Can high-flow nasal cannula reduce the rate of endotracheal intubation in adult patients with acute respiratory failure compared with conventional oxygen therapy and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Chest, 2017; 151(4):764–775.
35.
OuX, HuaY, LiuJ, GongC, ZhaoW. Effect of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy in adults with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. CMAJ, 2017; 189(7):E260–E267.
36.
MollerW, FengS, DomanskiU, FrankeKJ, CelikG, BartensteinP, et al. Nasal high flow reduces dead space. J Appl Physiol (1985), 2017; 122(1):191–197.
37.
NishimuraM. High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy in adults. J Intensive Care, 2015; 3(1):15.
38.
ParkeRL, BlochA, McGuinnessSP. Effect of very-high-flow nasal therapy on airway pressure and end-expiratory lung impedance in healthy volunteers. Respir Care, 2015; 60(10):1397–1403.
39.
NielsenKR, EllingtonLE, GrayAJ, StanberryLI, SmithLS, DiBlasiRM. Effect of high-flow nasal cannula on expiratory pressure and ventilation in infant, pediatric, and adult models. Respir Care, 2018; 63(2):147–157.
40.
VargasF, Saint-LegerM, BoyerA, BuiNH, HilbertG. Physiologic effects of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen in critical care subjects. Respir Care, 2015; 60(10):1369–1376.
41.
GoligherEC, SlutskyAS. Not just oxygen? Mechanisms of benefit from high-flow nasal cannula in hypoxemic respiratory failure. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2017; 195(9):1128–1131.
42.
BarbasCS, SerpaNA. New puzzles for the use of non-invasive ventilation for immunosuppressed patients. J Thorac Dis, 2016; 8(1):E100–E103.
43.
LuoJ, WangMY, ZhuH, LiangBM, LiuD, PengXY, et al. Can non-invasive positive pressure ventilation prevent endotracheal intubation in acute lung injury/acute respiratory distress syndrome? A meta-analysis. Respirology, 2014; 19(8):1149–1157.
44.
SpoletiniG, CortegianiA, GregorettiC. Physiopathological rationale of using high-flow nasal therapy in the acute and chronic setting: a narrative review. Trends Anaesth Crit Care, 2019; 26-27:22–29.
45.
FratJP, RagotS, CoudroyR, ConstantinJM, GiraultC, PratG, et al. Predictors of intubation in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure treated with a noninvasive oxygenation strategy. Crit Care Med, 2018; 46(2):208–215.
46.
MarshallJC, CookDJ, ChristouNV, BernardGR, SprungCL, SibbaldWJ. Multiple organ dysfunction score: a reliable descriptor of a complex clinical outcome. Crit Care Med, 1995; 23(10):1638–1652.
47.
FratJP, CoudroyR, ThilleAW. Non-invasive ventilation or high-flow oxygen therapy: when to choose one over the other?. Respirology, 2018.
48.
CortegianiA, CrimiC, NotoA, HelvizY, GiarratanoA, GregorettiC, et al. Effect of high-flow nasal therapy on dyspnea, comfort, and respiratory rate. Crit Care, 2019; 23(1):201.
49.
KangelarisKN, WareLB, WangCY, JanzDR, ZhuoH, MatthayMA, et al. Timing of intubation and clinical outcomes in adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Crit Care Med, 2016; 44(1):120–129.
50.
SztrymfB, MessikaJ, BertrandF, HurelD, LeonR, DreyfussD, et al. Beneficial effects of humidified high flow nasal oxygen in critical care patients: a prospective pilot study. Intensive Care Med, 2011; 37(11):1780–1786.
51.
ChiumelloD, BrochardL, MariniJJ, SlutskyAS, ManceboJ, RanieriVM, et al. Respiratory support in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: an expert opinion. Crit Care, 2017; 21(1):240.
