Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://repository.monashhealth.org/monashhealthjspui/handle/1/52143
Title: High-flow nasal oxygen therapy compared with conventional oxygen therapy in hospitalised patients with respiratory illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Authors: Seow D.;Khor Y.H.;Khung S.-W.;Smallwood D.M.;Ng Y.;Pascoe A.;Smallwood N.
Monash Health Department(s): Respiratory and Sleep Medicine
Institution: (Seow) Department of Internal Medicine, Sengkang General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore
(Khor, Pascoe, Smallwood) Respiratory Research@Alfred, Central Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
(Khor) Austin Health, Heidelberg, VIC, Australia
(Khung) Department of Respiratory and Sleep Medicine, Austin Health, Heidelberg, VIC, Australia
(Smallwood) Department of Respiratory Medicine, Western Health, Footscray, VIC, Australia
(Smallwood) Department of Medical Education, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
(Ng) Monash Lung, Sleep, Allergy and Immunology, Monash Health, Clayton, VIC, Australia
(Smallwood) Department of Respiratory Medicine, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
Issue Date: 27-Jul-2024
Copyright year: 2024
Publisher: BMJ Publishing Group
Place of publication: United Kingdom
Publication information: BMJ Open Respiratory Research. 11(1) (no pagination), 2024. Article Number: e002342. Date of Publication: 15 Jul 2024.
Journal: BMJ Open Respiratory Research
Abstract: Background High-flow nasal oxygen therapy (HFNO) is used in diverse hospital settings to treat patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF). This systematic review aims to summarise the evidence regarding any benefits HFNO therapy has compared with conventional oxygen therapy (COT) for patients with ARF. Methods Three databases (Embase, Medline and CENTRAL) were searched on 22 March 2023 for studies evaluating HFNO compared with COT for the treatment of ARF, with the primary outcome being hospital mortality and secondary outcomes including (but not limited to) escalation to invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or non-invasive ventilation (NIV). Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (randomised controlled trials (RCTs)), ROBINS-I (non-randomised trials) or Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (observational studies). RCTs and observational studies were pooled together for primary analyses, and secondary analyses used RCT data only. Treatment effects were pooled using the random effects model. Results 63 studies (26 RCTs, 13 cross-over and 24 observational studies) were included, with 10 230 participants. There was no significant difference in the primary outcome of hospital mortality (risk ratio, RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.26; p=0.29; 17 studies, n=5887) between HFNO and COT for all causes ARF. However, compared with COT, HFNO significantly reduced the overall need for escalation to IMV (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.95 p=0.003; 39 studies, n=8932); and overall need for escalation to NIV (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.98; p=0.04; 16 studies, n=3076). In subgroup analyses, when considering patients by illness types, those with acute-on-chronic respiratory failure who received HFNO compared with COT had a significant reduction in-hospital mortality (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.91; p=0.02). Discussion HFNO was superior to COT in reducing the need for escalation to both IMV and NIV but had no impact on the primary outcome of hospital mortality. These findings support recommendations that HFNO may be considered as first-line therapy for ARF.Copyright © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024.
DOI: http://monash.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjresp-2024-002342
PubMed URL: 39009460 [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=39009460]
URI: https://repository.monashhealth.org/monashhealthjspui/handle/1/52143
Type: Article
Subjects: acute lung injury
acute respiratory failure
respiratory distress syndrome
artificial ventilation
chronic obstructive lung disease
embolism
hemodialysis
hypercapnia
intensive care unit
lung disease
lung embolism
noninvasive ventilation
oxygen therapy
pneumothorax
respiratory failure
respiratory tract disease
Type of Clinical Study or Trial: Systematic review and/or meta-analysis
Appears in Collections:Articles

Show full item record

Page view(s)

4
checked on Dec 16, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in Monash Health Research Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.