Pandemic Sciences Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Infectious Diseases Department, Universidad de La Sabana, Chía, Colombia.
Crit Care. 2022 Sep 13;26(1):276. doi: 10.1186/s13054-022-04155-1.
Up to 30% of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 require advanced respiratory support, including high-flow nasal cannulas (HFNC), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV), or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). We aimed to describe the clinical characteristics, outcomes and risk factors for failing non-invasive respiratory support in patients treated with severe COVID-19 during the first two years of the pandemic in high-income countries (HICs) and low middle-income countries (LMICs).
This is a multinational, multicentre, prospective cohort study embedded in the ISARIC-WHO COVID-19 Clinical Characterisation Protocol. Patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who required hospital admission were recruited prospectively. Patients treated with HFNC, NIV, or IMV within the first 24 h of hospital admission were included in this study. Descriptive statistics, random forest, and logistic regression analyses were used to describe clinical characteristics and compare clinical outcomes among patients treated with the different types of advanced respiratory support.
A total of 66,565 patients were included in this study. Overall, 82.6% of patients were treated in HIC, and 40.6% were admitted to the hospital during the first pandemic wave. During the first 24 h after hospital admission, patients in HICs were more frequently treated with HFNC (48.0%), followed by NIV (38.6%) and IMV (13.4%). In contrast, patients admitted in lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) were less frequently treated with HFNC (16.1%) and the majority received IMV (59.1%). The failure rate of non-invasive respiratory support (i.e. HFNC or NIV) was 15.5%, of which 71.2% were from HIC and 28.8% from LMIC. The variables most strongly associated with non-invasive ventilation failure, defined as progression to IMV, were high leukocyte counts at hospital admission (OR [95%CI]; 5.86 [4.83-7.10]), treatment in an LMIC (OR [95%CI]; 2.04 [1.97-2.11]), and tachypnoea at hospital admission (OR [95%CI]; 1.16 [1.14-1.18]). Patients who failed HFNC/NIV had a higher 28-day fatality ratio (OR [95%CI]; 1.27 [1.25-1.30]).
In the present international cohort, the most frequently used advanced respiratory support was the HFNC. However, IMV was used more often in LMIC. Higher leucocyte count, tachypnoea, and treatment in LMIC were risk factors for HFNC/NIV failure. HFNC/NIV failure was related to worse clinical outcomes, such as 28-day mortality. Trial registration This is a prospective observational study; therefore, no health care interventions were applied to participants, and trial registration is not applicable.
多达 30%的 COVID-19 住院患者需要高级呼吸支持,包括高流量鼻导管(HFNC)、无创机械通气(NIV)或有创机械通气(IMV)。我们旨在描述在高收入国家(HIC)和中低收入国家(LMIC)大流行的头两年内,接受严重 COVID-19 治疗的患者中,使用非侵入性呼吸支持治疗失败的临床特征、结局和危险因素。
这是一项多中心、多国前瞻性队列研究,嵌入 ISARIC-WHO COVID-19 临床特征协议中。前瞻性招募了实验室确诊 SARS-CoV-2 感染且需要住院治疗的患者。在入院后 24 小时内接受 HFNC、NIV 或 IMV 治疗的患者被纳入本研究。描述性统计、随机森林和逻辑回归分析用于描述临床特征,并比较不同类型高级呼吸支持治疗的临床结局。
本研究共纳入 66565 例患者。总体而言,82.6%的患者在 HIC 接受治疗,40.6%在大流行第一波期间入院。在入院后 24 小时内,HIC 患者更常接受 HFNC(48.0%)治疗,其次是 NIV(38.6%)和 IMV(13.4%)。相比之下,在较低和中等收入国家(LMIC)入院的患者较少接受 HFNC(16.1%)治疗,大多数患者接受 IMV(59.1%)治疗。非侵入性呼吸支持(即 HFNC 或 NIV)失败率为 15.5%,其中 71.2%来自 HIC,28.8%来自 LMIC。与非侵入性通气失败(即进展为 IMV)最密切相关的变量是入院时白细胞计数高(比值比 [95%CI];5.86 [4.83-7.10])、在 LMIC 治疗(比值比 [95%CI];2.04 [1.97-2.11])和入院时呼吸急促(比值比 [95%CI];1.16 [1.14-1.18])。HFNC/NIV 治疗失败的患者 28 天病死率更高(比值比 [95%CI];1.27 [1.25-1.30])。
在目前的国际队列中,最常用的高级呼吸支持是 HFNC。然而,在 LMIC 中更常使用 IMV。较高的白细胞计数、呼吸急促和在 LMIC 治疗是 HFNC/NIV 失败的危险因素。HFNC/NIV 治疗失败与较差的临床结局相关,如 28 天死亡率。
试验注册 这是一项前瞻性观察性研究;因此,未向参与者应用任何医疗干预措施,无需试验注册。