BACKGROUND: Reintubation is associated with higher risk of mortality. There is no clear evidence on the best spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) method to reduce the risk of reintubation.
OBJECTIVE: Are different methods of conducting SBTs in critically ill patients associated with different risk of reintubation compared with T-tube?
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of different SBT methods on reintubation. We surveyed PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases from inception to January 26, 2024. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used to determine the likelihood that an intervention was ranked as the best. Pairwise comparisons were also investigated by frequentist meta-analysis. Certainty of the evidence was assessed according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach.
RESULTS: A total of 22 randomized controlled trials were included, for a total of 6,196 patients. The network included nine nodes, with 13 direct pairwise comparisons. About 71% of the patients were allocated to T-tube and pressure support ventilation with positive end-expiratory pressure, with 2,135 and 2,101 patients, respectively. The only intervention with a significantly lower risk of reintubation compared with T-tube was high flow oxygen (HFO) (risk ratio, 0.23; 95% credibility interval, 0.09-0.51; moderate quality evidence). HFO was associated with the highest probability of being the best intervention for reducing the risk of reintubation (81.86%; SUCRA, 96.42), followed by CPAP (11.8%; SUCRA, 76.75).
CONCLUSIONS: HFO SBT was associated with a lower risk of reintubation in comparison with other SBT methods. The results of our analysis should be considered with caution due to the low number of studies that investigated HFO SBTs and potential clinical heterogeneity related to cointerventions. Further trials should be performed to confirm the results on larger cohorts of patients and assess specific subgroups.
BACKGROUND: PROSPERO; No.: CRD42023449264; URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/.

UNASSIGNED: To evaluate the safety and feasibility of high flow oxygen therapy (HFOT), and to record SpO2 and desaturation episodes in dogs and cats receiving HFOT or conventional oxygen therapy (COT) during bronchoscopy ± bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL).
UNASSIGNED: Dogs and cats undergoing bronchoscopy ± BAL between January and May 2023 were included in the study. Patients were randomly allocated to two groups: HFOT (HFOT group; two cats and four dogs) and COT (COT group; one cat and five dogs). HFOT and COT were started at the beginning of the bronchoscopy. HFOT was delivered with a gas flow rate of 1 L/kg/min at an FiO2 of 100% and a temperature of 34°C (pediatric mode) or 37°C (adult mode). COT was delivered through the working channel of the bronchoscope at a rate of 1.5 L/min. The safety and feasibility of HFOT were assessed, and peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) was measured by pulse oximetry every 30 s throughout the procedure.
UNASSIGNED: HFOT was feasible and safe in both dogs and cats with no complications reported. While there was no significant difference in the number of desaturation episodes (SpO2 < 94%) between the two groups, none of the patients in the HFOT group experienced severe desaturation (SpO2 < 90%). In contrast, two patients in the COT group had an SpO2 < 90%. Mean SpO2 was significantly higher in the HFOT group compared to the COT group at T0 (98% ± 2% vs. 94 ± 2%), T0.5 (98% ± 2% vs. 94% ± 3%) and T1 (98% ± 2% vs. 94% ± 4%).
UNASSIGNED: To the authors\' knowledge, this is the largest study conducted to date using HFOT during bronchoscopy in dogs and cats. Our results suggest that HFOT is feasible and safe during bronchoscopy ± BAL. Furthermore, HFOT may reduce the risk of desaturation episodes in dogs and cats undergoing bronchoscopy and BAL.

Acute dyspnea represents one of the most frequent symptoms leading to emergency room evaluation. Its significant prognostic value warrants a careful evaluation. The differential diagnosis of dyspnea is complex due to the lack of specificity and the loose association between its intensity and the severity of the underlying pathological condition. The initial assessment of dyspnea calls for prompt diagnostic evaluation and identification of optimal monitoring strategy and provides information useful to allocate the patient to the most appropriate setting of care. In recent years, accumulating evidence indicated that lung ultrasound, along with echocardiography, represents the first rapid and non-invasive line of assessment that accurately differentiates heart, lung or extra-pulmonary involvement in patients with dyspnea. Moreover, non-invasive respiratory support modalities such as high-flow nasal oxygen and continuous positive airway pressure have aroused major clinical interest, in light of their efficacy and practicality to treat patients with dyspnea requiring ventilatory support, without using invasive mechanical ventilation. This clinical review is focused on the pathophysiology of acute dyspnea, on its clinical presentation and evaluation, including ultrasound-based diagnostic workup, and on available non-invasive modalities of respiratory support that may be required in patients with acute dyspnea secondary or associated with respiratory failure.

The spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) is the final step of weaning from invasive mechanical ventilation. An SBT is aimed at predicting work of breathing (WOB) after extubation and, most importantly, a patient\'s eligibility for extubation. The optimal SBT modality remains debated. A high-flow oxygen (HFO) has been tested during SBT in clinical study only, which is why no definite conclusion can be drawn on its physiologic effects on the endotracheal tube. Our objective was to assess, on a bench, inspiratory tidal volume (VT), total PEEP, and WOB across 3 different SBT modalities: T-piece, 40 L/min HFO, and 60 L/min HFO.
A test lung model was set with 3 conditions of resistance and linear compliance, 3 inspiratory efforts (low, normal, and high), each at 2 breathing frequencies (low and high for 20 and 30 breaths/min, respectively). Pairwise comparisons and a quasi-Poisson generalized linear model that compared SBT modalities were performed.
Inspiratory VT, total PEEP, and WOB differed from one SBT modality to another. Inspiratory VT remained higher with the T-piece than in the HFO independent of the mechanical condition, effort intensity, and breathing frequency (P < .001 in each comparison). WOB adjusted by the inspiratory VT was significantly lower during SBT performed with an HFO than when performed with the T-piece (P < .001 in each comparison). The total PEEP was significantly higher in the HFO at 60 L/min than in the other modalities (P < .001). The end points were significantly influenced by breathing frequency, effort intensity, and mechanical condition.
With the same effort intensity and breathing frequency, inspiratory VT was higher in the T-piece than in the other modalities. Compared with the T-piece, WOB was significantly lower in the HFO condition and higher flow was a benefit. Based on the results of the present study, the HFO as an SBT modality would seem to require clinical testing.

UNASSIGNED: The use of high flow oxygen therapy (HFOT) has significantly escalated during the COVID-19 pandemic. HFOT can be delivered through both dedicated devices and ICU ventilators. HFOT can be administered to a patient via a nasal cannula (NC). In intubated patients, a tracheal cannula (TC) is used instead. In this study, we aim to compare the work of breathing (WOB) using a TC or NC and to explore whether differences exist among HFOT devices.
UNASSIGNED: Seven HFOT devices (three dedicated and four ICU ventilators) were connected to a manikin head (Laerdal Medical) through a NC (Optiflow 3S, large size, Fisher and Paykel Healthcare) or a TC (OPT 970 Optiflow+, Fisher and Paykel Healthcare). Each device was also attached to a manikin head that was connected to a lung simulator (ASL5000, Ingmar Medical), set at 40 ml/cmH2O compliance, 10 cmH2O/L/s resistance, and sinusoidal inspiratory effort (muscular pressure 10 cmH2O, rate 30 breaths/min). HFOT was delivered at 40 L/min and at 21% inspired oxygen fraction. The total WOB per breath and its resistive and elastic components were automatically analyzed breath by breath over the last 20 breaths by using Campbell\'s diagram.
UNASSIGNED: The WOB and its resistive and elastic components were significantly lower with the TC than with the NC for every device, and systematically lower with the reference device than with others. These differences were, however, very small and may be not clinically relevant.
UNASSIGNED: The WOB is lower with the TC than with the NC and with the reference device, compared with the most recent devices.

The typical approach to management of respiratory distress is focused on oxygen supplementation. However, additional oxygen alone does not improve outcomes, particularly in critically ill patients. Instead, supplemental oxygen can be associated with increased morbidities. We present the hypothesis that clinicians should focus on reducing the work of breathing early in the course of critical illness. Rather than simply supplementing oxygen, newer technologies including high flow nasal oxygen, may be utilized to increase the efficiency of gas exchange. By reducing the work of breathing, the cardiac workload can be reduced, thus relieving some excess physiologic stress and supporting the critically ill patient. To illustrate this point, we provided three clinical cases of respiratory failure from non-pulmonary origins; all cases displayed hemodynamic improvement due to reducing the work of breathing through high-velocity therapy prior to receiving definitive therapy for underlying pathologies.

Due to the limited number of critical care providers in the United States, even well-staffed hospitals are at risk of exhausting both physical and human resources during the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). One potential response to this problem is redeployment of non-critical care providers to increase the supply of available clinicians. To support efforts to increase capacity as part of surge preparation for the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak, we created an online educational resource for nonintensivist providers to learn basic critical care content. Among those materials, we created a series of one-page learning guides for the management of common problems encountered in the intensive care unit (ICU). These guides were meant to be used as just-in-time tools to guide problem-solving during the provision of ICU care. This article presents five guides related to the evaluation and management of patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure and the basics of invasive mechanical ventilation.

The Coronavirus pandemic has a high mortality rate in patients that are mechanically ventilated, which has led to an ever increasing interest in noninvasive forms of oxygenation. The use of these devices has the theoretical risk of increased exposure risk because of possible particulate generation. This study aimed to quantify the particulate generation associated with different oxygen devices.
This was a prospective single center study conducted during September 2020 using ten healthy adult volunteers. Testing was conducted in a negative pressure hospital room using a light scattering particle counter. The oxygen devices used were a nasal cannula, an OxyMask™, a non-rebreathing mask, and a high flow system. Particle measurements were obtained at baseline in the room and then with each oxygen delivery device and pre-specified oxygen flow rates. These measurements were obtained different distances from the volunteer with their mouth open. A Wilcoxon/Kruskal-Wallis test was performed on each separate oxygen modality with all flow rates as one model.
The particle concentrations were slightly non-significantly increased with the OxyMask™ and non-rebreathing mask at the closest distance measured. As the distance increased, these counts decreased closer to ambient levels. The nasal cannula and high flow nasal cannula particle counts were not significantly different from ambient measurements at either distance.
Nasal cannula, OxyMask™, non-rebreathing mask, and high flow oxygen did not generate any additional aerosols or droplets above a baseline room measurement, but further studies are necessary to determine infectious risk.

Thermo-humidified nasal high flow (NHF) oxygen therapy is increasingly used in the management of respiratory failure. This therapy has recently gained attention as an alternative non-invasive respiratory support in several clinical scenarios, including acute and chronic settings. NHF enhances the patient\'s comfort and tolerance when compared with standard oxygen by supplying a heated and humidified mixture of air and oxygen at flows up to 60L/min. It can be delivered through different devices. Although few studies have compared the clinical effects of different NHF systems, the purpose of this paper is to describe the major benefits of NHF and to provide a quick guide on how to implement this therapy in daily practice. We have also included a brief description of the most frequently used NHF systems.

BACKGROUND: The effect of high-flow nasal therapy (HFNT) in individuals with an exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and hypercapnia is not well studied. We assessed patient tolerance and impact of air-gas therapy delivered by humidified HFNT (20-35 L/min) on gas exchange in hypercapnic COPD patients during hospitalization for COPD exacerbation. We hypothesized that HFNT use would be safe and well tolerated in individuals hospitalized for COPD exacerbation regardless of the degree of hypercapnia.
METHODS: Patients hospitalized for a COPD exacerbation were included if they were hypercapnic (arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide [PaCO2] > 45 mmHg), ≥ 10 pack-year history, and agreed to treatment with HFNT, along with daily arterial blood gas (ABG) samples and bedside spirometry. They were placed on a HFNT system following admission for at least 3 days with an air-gas blend to maintain a flow rate between 20-35 L/min and fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) titrated to keep oxygen saturation (SaO2) values > 90%. Patient tolerance of HFNT and evidence of clinical deterioration as defined by worsening hypoxia or hypercapnia was the primary endpoint.
RESULTS: Ten consecutive patients participated in the study. The patients had frequent prior exacerbations, were hypercapnic, dyspneic, and gas trapped. Participants received an air-gas flow rate (median [interquartile range (IQR)] 25 (IQR 20-30) L/min and FiO2 of 30 (IQR 30-30) %. There was no increase in PaCO2- levels (p = 0.26) or dyspnea (Borg scale, p= 0.52) while using HFNT. No patient discontinued HFNT, had further decompensation, required non-invasive ventilation or intubation during the study period.
CONCLUSIONS: In a pilot study, patients experiencing a severe COPD exacerbation were able to tolerate continuous HFNT safely regardless of degree of hypercapnia.