Department of Anesthesiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, P.R. China.
Weihai Municipal Affiliated Hospital of Shandong University, Weihai, China.
Ther Adv Respir Dis. 2022 Jan-Dec;16:17534666221087847. doi: 10.1177/17534666221087847.
During the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic raging around the world, the effectiveness of respiratory support treatment has dominated people's field of vision. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness and value of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) for COVID-19 patients.
A comprehensive systematic review PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, Scopus, WHO database, China Biology Medicine Disc (SINOMED), and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases was conducted, followed by meta-analysis. RevMan 5.4 was used to analyze the results and risk of bias. The primary outcome is the number of deaths at day 28. The secondary outcomes are the occurrence of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), the number of deaths (no time-limited), length of intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital stay, ventilator-free days, and oxygenation index [partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO)/fraction of inhaled oxygen (FiO)] at 24 h.
In total, nine studies [one randomized controlled trial (RCT), seven retrospective studies, and one prospective study] totaling 1582 patients were enrolled in the meta-analysis. The results showed that the incidence of IMV, number of deaths (no time-limited), and length of ICU stay were not statistically significant in the HFNC group compared with the NIV group (s = 0.71, 0.31, and 0.33, respectively). Whereas the HFNC group performed significant advantages in terms of the number of deaths at day 28, length of hospital stay and oxygenation index ( < 0.05). Only in the ventilator-free days did NIV show advantages over the HFNC group ( < 0.0001).
For COVID-19 patients, the use of HFNC therapy is associated with the reduction of the number of deaths at day 28 and length of hospital stay, and can significantly improve oxygenation index (PaO/FiO) at 24 h. However, there was no favorable between the HFNC and NIV groups in the occurrence of IMV. NIV group was superior only in terms of ventilator-free days.
在全球肆虐的 2019 年新型冠状病毒病(COVID-19)大流行期间,呼吸支持治疗的效果引起了人们的关注。本研究旨在比较高流量鼻导管(HFNC)与无创通气(NIV)在 COVID-19 患者中的疗效和价值。
对 PubMed、Web of Science、Cochrane、Scopus、世界卫生组织(WHO)数据库、中国生物医学文献数据库(SINOMED)和中国知网(CNKI)数据库进行全面系统检索,然后进行荟萃分析。使用 RevMan 5.4 分析结果和偏倚风险。主要结局为第 28 天的死亡率。次要结局为有创机械通气(IMV)的发生、无时间限制的死亡率、入住重症监护病房(ICU)和医院的时间、呼吸机使用天数和 24 小时氧合指数[动脉血氧分压(PaO)/吸入氧分数(FiO)]。
共纳入 9 项研究[1 项随机对照试验(RCT)、7 项回顾性研究和 1 项前瞻性研究],共纳入 1582 例患者进行荟萃分析。结果显示,HFNC 组与 NIV 组在 IMV 的发生率、无时间限制的死亡率和 ICU 入住时间方面无统计学意义(s=0.71、0.31 和 0.33)。而 HFNC 组在第 28 天的死亡率、住院时间和氧合指数方面具有显著优势( < 0.05)。只有在呼吸机使用天数方面,NIV 组优于 HFNC 组( < 0.0001)。
对于 COVID-19 患者,HFNC 治疗与降低第 28 天的死亡率和住院时间有关,并可显著改善 24 小时的氧合指数(PaO/FiO)。然而,HFNC 组与 NIV 组在 IMV 的发生方面没有优势。只有在呼吸机使用天数方面,NIV 组优于 HFNC 组。