6533b7d2fe1ef96bd125ed23

RESEARCH PRODUCT

High-flow nasal oxygen versus conventional oxygen therapy in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and mild hypoxaemia: a randomised controlled trial

Crimi ClaudiaNoto AlbertoMadotto FabianaMariachiara IppolitoNolasco SantiCampisi RaffaeleDe Vuono StefanoFiorentino GiuseppePantazopoulos IoannisChalkias AthanasiosLibra AlessandroMattei AlessioScala RaffaeleClini Enrico MErgan BegumLujan ManelWinck Joao CarlosGiarratano AntoninoCarlucci AnnalisaGregoretti CesareGroff PaoloCortegiani AndreaMarino Luigi

subject

Pulmonary and Respiratory MedicineCritical CareCOVID-19 Critical Care PneumoniaCOVID-19; Critical Care; PneumoniaCOVID-19Pneumonia

description

RationaleIn patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and mild hypoxaemia, the clinical benefit of high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) remains unclear. We aimed to examine whether HFNO compared with conventional oxygen therapy (COT) could prevent escalation of respiratory support in this patient population.MethodsIn this multicentre, randomised, parallel-group, open-label trial, patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) ≤92% who required oxygen therapy were randomised to HFNO or COT. The primary outcome was the rate of escalation of respiratory support (ie, continuous positive airway pressure, non-invasive ventilation or invasive mechanical ventilation) within 28 days. Among secondary outcomes, clinical recovery was defined as the improvement in oxygenation (SpO2≥96% with fractional inspired oxygen (FiO2) ≤30% or partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide/FiO2ratio >300 mm Hg).ResultsAmong 364 randomised patients, 55 (30.3%) of 181 patients assigned to HFNO and 70 (38.6%) of 181 patients assigned to COT underwent escalation of respiratory support, with no significant difference between groups (absolute risk difference −8.2% (95% CI −18% to +1.4%); RR 0.79 (95% CI 0.59 to 1.05); p=0.09). There was no significant difference in clinical recovery (69.1% vs 60.8%; absolute risk difference 8.2% (95% CI −1.5% to +18.0%), RR 1.14 (95% CI 0.98 to 1.32)), intensive care unit admission (7.7% vs 11.0%, absolute risk difference −3.3% (95% CI −9.3% to +2.6%)), and in hospital length of stay (11 (IQR 8–17) vs 11 (IQR 7–20) days, absolute risk difference −1.0% (95% CI −3.1% to +1.1%)).ConclusionsAmong patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and mild hypoxaemia, the use of HFNO did not significantly reduce the likelihood of escalation of respiratory support.Trial registration numberNCT04655638.

10.1136/thoraxjnl-2022-218806https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11769/548104