Comparison between high-flow nasal oxygen and HFNO and NIV alone in patients with COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study

• Published in: European journal of medical research 2024-04, Vol.29 (1)
• Main Authors: da Cruz, Amanda Pereira, Ma, Marques, Victoria, Christovam, Samantha, Battaglini, Denise, Robba, Chiara, Pelosi, Paolo, Rocco, Patricia Rieken Macedo, Cruz, Fernanda Ferreira, dos Santos Samary, Cynthia, Silva, Pedro Leme
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Analysis; Care and treatment; Comorbidity; Diabetes
• ISSN: 0949-2321
• DOI: 10.1186/s40001-024-01826-3

Background Non-invasive respiratory support (conventional oxygen therapy [COT], non-invasive ventilation [NIV], high-flow nasal oxygen [HFNO], and NIV alternated with HFNO [NIV + HFNO] may reduce the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in patients with COVID-19. The outcome of patients treated non-invasively depends on clinical severity at admission. We assessed the need for IMV according to NIV, HFNO, and NIV + HFNO in patients with COVID-19 according to disease severity and evaluated in-hospital survival rates and hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) lengths of stay. Methods This cohort study was conducted using data collected between March 2020 and July 2021. Patients [greater than or equal to] 18 years admitted to the ICU with a diagnosis of COVID-19 were included. Patients hospitalized for < 3 days, receiving therapy (COT, NIV, HFNO, or NIV + HFNO) for < 48 h, pregnant, and with no primary outcome data were excluded. The COT group was used as reference for multivariate Cox regression model adjustment. Results Of 1371 patients screened, 958 were eligible: 692 (72.2%) on COT, 92 (9.6%) on NIV, 31 (3.2%) on HFNO, and 143 (14.9%) on NIV + HFNO. The results for the patients in each group were as follows: median age (interquartile range): NIV (64 [49-79] years), HFNO (62 [55-70] years), NIV + HFNO (62 [48-72] years) (p = 0.615); heart failure: NIV (54.5%), HFNO (36.3%), NIV + HFNO (9%) (p = 0.003); diabetes mellitus: HFNO (17.6%), NIV + HFNO (44.7%) (p = 0.048). > 50% lung damage on chest computed tomography (CT): NIV (13.3%), HFNO (15%), NIV + HFNO (71.6%) (p = 0.038); SpO.sub.2/FiO.sub.2: NIV (271 [118-365] mmHg), HFNO (317 [254-420] mmHg), NIV + HFNO (229 [102-317] mmHg) (p = 0.001); rate of IMV: NIV (26.1%, p = 0.002), HFNO (22.6%, p = 0.023), NIV + HFNO (46.8%); survival rate: HFNO (83.9%), NIV + HFNO (63.6%) (p = 0.027); ICU length of stay: NIV (8.5 [5-14] days), NIV + HFNO (15 [10-25] days (p < 0.001); hospital length of stay: NIV (13 [10-21] days), NIV + HFNO (20 [15-30] days) (p < 0.001). After adjusting for comorbidities, chest CT score and SpO.sub.2/FiO.sub.2, the risk of IMV in patients on NIV + HFNO remained high (hazard ratio, 1.88; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-3.04). Conclusions In patients with COVID-19, NIV alternating with HFNO was associated with a higher rate of IMV independent of the presence of comorbidities, chest CT score and SpO.sub.2/FiO.sub.2. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05579080. Keywords: C