ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the efficacy of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNC) in post-extubation intensive care unit (ICU) patients.MethodsThe PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang, VIP Databases were searched for all published available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or cohort studies about HFNC therapy in post-extubation ICU patients. The control group was treated with conventional oxygen therapy (COT) or non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV), while the experimental group was treated with HFNC. Two reviewers separately searched the articles, evaluated the quality of the literatures, extracted data according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. RevMan5.3 was used for meta-analysis. The main outcome measurements included reintubation rate and length of ICU stay. The secondary outcomes included ICU mortality and hospital acquired pneumonia (HAP) rate.ResultsA total of 20 articles were enrolled. There were 3 583 patients enrolled, with 1 727 patients in HFNC group, and 1 856 patients in control group (841 patients with COT, and 1 015 with NIPPV). Meta-analysis showed that HFNC had a significant advantage over COT in reducing the reintubation rate of patients with postextubation (P<0.000 01), but there was no significant difference as compared with that of NIPPV (P=0.21). It was shown by pooled analysis of two subgroups that compared with COT/NIPPV, HFNC had a significant advantage in reducing reintubation rate in patients of postextubation (P<0.000 01). There was no significant difference in ICU mortality between HFNC and COT (P=0.38) or NIPPV (P=0.36). There was no significant difference in length of ICU stay between HFNC and COT (P=0.30), but there had a significant advantage in length of ICU stay between HFNC and NIPPV (P<0.000 01). It was shown by pooled analysis of two subgroups that compared with COT/NIPPV, HFNC had a significant advantage in length of ICU stay (P=0.04). There was no significant difference in HAP rate between HFNC and COT (P=0.61) or NIPPV (P=0.23).ConclusionsThere is a significant advantage to decrease reintubation rate between HFNC and COT, but there is no significant difference in ICU mortality, length of ICU stay or HAP rate. There is a significant advantage to decrease length of ICU stay between HFNC and NIPPV, but there is no significant difference in ICU mortality, reintubation rate or HAP rate.
ObjectiveTo investigate the application value of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) performed in patients with unplanned extubation (UE) in intensive care unit (ICU).MethodsThis was a retrospective analysis. The clinical data, application of NIV, reintubation rate and prognosis of UE patients in the ICU of this hospital from January 2014 to December 2018 were reviewed, and the patients were assigned to the control group or the NIV group according to the application of NIV after UE. The data between the two groups were compared and the application effects of NIV in UE patients were evaluated.ResultsA total of 66 UE patients were enrolled in this study, including 44 males and 22 females and with an average age of (64.2±16.1) years. Out of them, 41 patients (62.1%) used nasal catheter or mask for oxygenation as the control group, 25 patients (37.9%) used NIV as the NIV group. The Acute Physiology andChronic Health EvaluationⅡ score of the control group and the NIV group were (18.6±7.7) vs. (14.8±6.3), P=0.043. The causes of respiratory failure in the control group and the NIV group were as follows: pneumonia 16 patients (39.0%) vs. 7 patients (28.0%), postoperative respiratory failure 7 patients (17.1%) vs. 8 patients (32.0%), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease 8 patients (19.5%) vs. 6 patients (24.0%), others 5 patients (12.2%) vs. 4 patients (16.0%), heart failure 3 patients (7.3%) vs. 0 patients (0%), nervous system diseases 2 (4.9%) vs. 0 patients (0%), which showed no significant difference between the two groups. Mechanical ventilation time before UE were (12.5±19.8) vs (12.7±15.2) d (P=0.966), PaO2 of the control group and the NIV group before UE was (114.9±37.4) vs. (114.4±46.3)mm Hg (P=0.964), and oxygenation index was (267.1±82.0) vs. (257.4±80.0)mm Hg (P=0.614). Reintubation rate was 65.9% in the control group and 24.0% in the NIV group (P=0.001). The duration of mechanical ventilation was (23.9±26.0) vs. (21.8±26.0)d (P=0.754), the length of stay in ICU was (34.4±36.6) vs. (28.5±25.8)d (P=0.48). The total mortality rate in this study was 19.7%. The mortality rate in the control group and NIV group were 22.0% and 16.0% (P=0.555).ConclusionPatients with UE in ICU may consider using NIV to avoid reintubation.