Highflow: High Flow Nasal Cannula Versus Non-Invasive (NIV)in Both Hypoxemic and Hypercapnic Respiratory Failure.

Sponsor
Assiut University (Other)
Overall Status
Not yet recruiting
CT.gov ID
NCT05499039
Collaborator
(none)
80
1
4
24.3
3.3

Study Details

Study Description

Brief Summary

high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy utilizes an air oxygen blend allowing from 21 % to 1 00% FiO2 delivery and generates up to 60 L/min flow rates The gas is heated and humidified through an active heated humidifier and delivered via a single limb heated inspiratory circuit (to avoid heat loss and condensation) to the patient through a large diameter nasal cannula Theoretically, HFNC offers significant advantages in oxygenation and ventilation over COT. Constant high flow oxygen delivery provides steady FiO2 and decreases oxygen dilution. It also washes out physiologic dead space and generates positive end expiration pressure (PEEP) that augments ventilation The heated humidification facilitates secretion clearance, decreases bronchospasm, and maintains mucosal integrity.

This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of HFNC compared to NIMV in management of Acute hypoxemic and acute hypercapneic respiratory failure

Condition or Disease Intervention/Treatment Phase
  • Device: High flow nasal cannula (HFNC)
  • Device: Non-Invasive Mechanical Ventilation (NIV)
N/A

Detailed Description

  • Acute respiratory failure (ARF) is a common and serious complication among hospitalized patients. It is the most frequent reason for admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) . It carries an in-hospital mortality rate of 20.6% and cost 54.3 billion dollars nationwide in United States in 2009. Among those patients with ARF, 42.1 % of patients require mechanical ventilation (MV), which is associated with a significant increase in both length of stay and medical expense

  • ARF can be categorized into acute hypoxemic respiratory failure(AHRF) and acute hypercapneic respiratory failure.

  • Supplemental oxygen and treatment of the underlying cause is the mainstay of therapy for AHRF. Options for oxygen therapy include conventional oxygen therapy delivered via nasal cannulae (NC) or face masks (FM) initially, followed by non-invasive ventilation (NIV), and finally intubation or mechanical ventilation (MV) .

  • Traditional NC and FM (collectively referred to as conventional oxygen therapy or COT) can achieve flow rates of up to 1 5 L/min. However, these flow rates may be significantly lower than patients' spontaneous inspiratory flow rates and the oxygen is diluted as it is mixed with room air Consequently, the fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) delivered Is variable and this is thought to explain why many patients require an escalation of oxygen therapy to NIV or MV.

  • By contrast, humidified high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy utilizes an air oxygen blend allowing from 21 % to 1 00% FiO2 delivery and generates up to 60 L/min flow rates The gas is heated and humidified through an active heated humidifier and delivered via a single limb heated inspiratory circuit (to avoid heat loss and condensation) to the patient through a large diameter nasal cannula Theoretically, HFNC offers significant advantages in oxygenation and ventilation over COT. Constant high flow oxygen delivery provides steady FiO2 and decreases oxygen dilution. It also washes out physiologic dead space and generates positive end expiration pressure (PEEP) that augments ventilation The heated humidification facilitates secretion clearance, decreases bronchospasm, and maintains mucosal integrity

  • HFNC has been well studied in the neonatal and pediatric settings However, in adults, the use of HFNC has Primarily been studied in post-cardiac surgery post-extubation and bronchoscopy patients. However, the utility of HFNC use in adults with AHRF in emergency and general inpatient practice is less clear .Heated and humidified high-flow oxygen through nasal cannula (HFNC) has been developed over the past 2 decades, as an alternative to standard oxygen delivery systems

  • The device delivers a flow rate up to 8 L/min in infants and 60 L/min in adults and allows adjustment of inspired oxygen independently of the flow rate. Traditional oxygen delivery systems-nasal cannula, non-rebreathing masks, masks with reservoir bags, and Venturi masks-allow varying levels of inspired oxygen reliant on the patient's breathing pattern, peak inspiratory flow rate, delivery system, and mask characteristics Additionally, their inability to heat and humidify gas limits patient's comfort and tolerability at high-flow rates.

  • . In adults, it has been used to treat hypoxemic respiratory failure, cardiogenic pulmonary edema, postoperatively and postextubation in do-not-intubate patients or during bronchoscopy

  • To date, the literature supports the possibility to use HFNC as alternative to non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in some settings, while in others might be even superior . It is also an alternative to standard oxygen as first line therapy in management of patients with acute respiratory failure . NIV is strongly recommended in patients with acute-on-chronic respiratory failure associated with acute respiratory acidosis, the vast majority of whom meet the criteria for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) exacerbation

  • Recently, Studies revealed no difference of the 30-day mortality and intubation rate between NIV and HFNC, in severe acute exacerbation of COPD with moderate, hypercapnic, acute respiratory failure. In a retrospective study, that suggeste that HFNC oxygen therapy was beneficial, even in respiratory failure Type 2, resulting in significant improvement of both oxygenation and hypercapnia. another study also indicated that HFNO leads to a flow-dependent reduction in PaCO2 in patients with stable hypercapnic COPD, due to a washout of the respiratory tract and a functional reduction in dead space

  • Although cumulative evidence supports that HFNC is effective in patients with hypercapnia, randomized studies to compare HFNC vs. NIV in patients with acute, hypercapnic respiratory failure are missing. so the investigator conducting this prospective, randomized, controlled trial, involving patients admitted to the Emergency Department (ED), to compare the efficacy of HFNC versus NIV in the management of acute hypercapnic respiratory failure.

Study Design

Study Type:
Interventional
Anticipated Enrollment :
80 participants
Allocation:
Randomized
Intervention Model:
Parallel Assignment
Intervention Model Description:
patients with will be randomly enrolled to either non invasive group or HFNC group and improvement and patient satisfaction will be assessedpatients with will be randomly enrolled to either non invasive group or HFNC group and improvement and patient satisfaction will be assessed
Masking:
Quadruple (Participant, Care Provider, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)
Masking Description:
Neither the participant , care provider , the investigator nor the outcome assessor will select patients in both groups , see results of other patients till the end of the study or informed by literature opinion in this intervention
Primary Purpose:
Treatment
Official Title:
High Flow Nasal Cannula Versus Non-Invasive (NIV)in Both Hypoxemic and Hypercapnic Respiratory Failure.
Anticipated Study Start Date :
Oct 10, 2022
Anticipated Primary Completion Date :
Oct 10, 2024
Anticipated Study Completion Date :
Oct 20, 2024

Arms and Interventions

Arm Intervention/Treatment
Other: Group A1 (NIVMV on hypoxemic)

Use of NIV on acute hypoxemic respiratory failure patients

Device: Non-Invasive Mechanical Ventilation (NIV)
Respiratory assistance is provided by a NIV either Puritan Bennet 840 , Engström Carestation or Hamilton-G5 , will be used for conventional non-invasive ventilation via an oronasal mask. Settings will be adjusted based on the clinical assessment of the respiratory therapist . Initial setting includes: - Positive End Expiratory Pressure (PEEP): 5 cmH2O. Pressure support (PS): 12-20 cmH2O. FiO2 will be adjusted to achieve a SpO2 at least 95% Intervention: Device: non-invasive ventilation

Other: Group A2 (HFNC on hypoxemic)

Use of HFNC on acute hypoxemic respiratory failure patients

Device: High flow nasal cannula (HFNC)
High flow nasal cannula consists of an apparatus that allows adjustable FiO2 from 21 to 100% and delivers a modified gas flow up to 60 l/ min . will be set with: - Temperature at 37°C or 34°C Flow rate 30: 50 L/min. FiO2 will be adjusted to achieve a SpO2 at least 95%
Other Names:
  • High velocity nasal insufflation (vapotherm)
  • Other: Group B1 (NIVMV on hypercapneic)

    Use of NIV on acute hypercapneic respiratory failure patients

    Device: Non-Invasive Mechanical Ventilation (NIV)
    Respiratory assistance is provided by a NIV either Puritan Bennet 840 , Engström Carestation or Hamilton-G5 , will be used for conventional non-invasive ventilation via an oronasal mask. Settings will be adjusted based on the clinical assessment of the respiratory therapist . Initial setting includes: - Positive End Expiratory Pressure (PEEP): 5 cmH2O. Pressure support (PS): 12-20 cmH2O. FiO2 will be adjusted to achieve a SpO2 at least 95% Intervention: Device: non-invasive ventilation

    Other: Group B2 (HFNC on hypercapneic)

    Use of HFNC on acute hypercapneic respiratory failure patients

    Device: High flow nasal cannula (HFNC)
    High flow nasal cannula consists of an apparatus that allows adjustable FiO2 from 21 to 100% and delivers a modified gas flow up to 60 l/ min . will be set with: - Temperature at 37°C or 34°C Flow rate 30: 50 L/min. FiO2 will be adjusted to achieve a SpO2 at least 95%
    Other Names:
  • High velocity nasal insufflation (vapotherm)
  • Outcome Measures

    Primary Outcome Measures

    1. Evaluation of HFNC and NIV in correction of Acidosis . [Baseline]

      Evaluation of the effectiveness of HFNC VS NIV in correction of Acidosis through measurement of PH via arterial blood gases test (ABG). Evaluation of the effectiveness of HFNC in correction of Acidosis through measurement of PH via arterial blood gases test (ABG).

    2. Evaluation of HFNC and NIV in correction of Hypercapnia. [Baseline]

      Evaluation of the effectiveness of HFNC VS NIV in correction of Hypercapnia through measurement of PCO2 by mmHg via arterial blood gases test (ABG)

    3. Evaluation of HFNC and NIV in management of Acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. [Baseline]

      Evaluation of the effectiveness of HFNC VS NIV in management of Acute hypoxemic respiratory failure through measurement of PO2 via arterial blood gases test (ABG)

    4. Evaluation of HFNC and NIV in correction of Hypoxemia. [Baseline]

      Evaluation of the effectiveness of HFNC VS NIV in correction of Hypoxemia through measurement of O2 saturation by percentage % via pulse oximeter.

    5. Endotracheal intubation rate. [Baseline]

      needs escalation to invasive mechanical ventilation

    Secondary Outcome Measures

    1. In hospital mortality. [one week]

      death

    2. duration of intervention [one week]

      time needed for ventilatory support

    3. hospital coast [one week]

      effects on hospital coast

    4. duration of ICU stay . [one week]

      icu occupancy

    5. development of complications [one week]

      due to devices

    Eligibility Criteria

    Criteria

    Ages Eligible for Study:
    18 Years to 95 Years
    Sexes Eligible for Study:
    All
    Accepts Healthy Volunteers:
    No
    Inclusion Criteria:
    • Age above 18

    • Acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. (Participants admitted with acute hypoxemic respiratory with the following criteria:

    RR> 25 breath/minute Use of accessory muscles of respiration, paradoxical breathing, thoracoabdominal asynchrony.

    Hypoxemia evidenced by PaO2 / FiO2 ratio <300)

    • Acute hypercapnic respiratory failure ((Participants admitted with acute hypercapneic respiratory with the following criteria:

    pO2 less than 60 mm Hg (hypoxemia). pCO2 greater than 50 mm Hg (hypercapnia) with pH less than 7.35. Signs and symptoms of acute respiratory distress)

    Exclusion Criteria:
    • Patients with preprocedural or post-procedural settings (ex: surgery, bronchoscope) post- extubation,

    • Patients with cancer or transplant patients,

    • Patients less than 18 years old

    • Patients with Heart failure patients

    • Patients with renal failure patients

    • Patients with hemodynamic instability

    • Patients with central causes of hypercapnic respiratory failure

    • Patients with disturbed conscious level

    • Patients who refuse to participate in the study

    • Indication for emergency endotracheal intubation

    • Tracheotomy or other upper airway disorders

    • Active upper gastrointestinal bleeding

    Contacts and Locations

    Locations

    Site City State Country Postal Code
    1 Assiut University Assiut Egypt

    Sponsors and Collaborators

    • Assiut University

    Investigators

    • Study Director: Zein Al-abdeen Ah Sayed, professor, Assiut University
    • Principal Investigator: Taghred SA Meshref, professor, Assiut University

    Study Documents (Full-Text)

    None provided.

    More Information

    Publications

    None provided.
    Responsible Party:
    Abdelrahman Alham, Principal Investigator, Assiut University
    ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
    NCT05499039
    Other Study ID Numbers:
    • HFNC VS NIV
    First Posted:
    Aug 12, 2022
    Last Update Posted:
    Aug 24, 2022
    Last Verified:
    Aug 1, 2022
    Individual Participant Data (IPD) Sharing Statement:
    No
    Plan to Share IPD:
    No
    Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product:
    No
    Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product:
    No
    Product Manufactured in and Exported from the U.S.:
    No
    Additional relevant MeSH terms:

    Study Results

    No Results Posted as of Aug 24, 2022