High-flow nasal cannula oxygen versus conventional oxygen therapy for acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Sylvain Le Pape; Sigourney Savart; François Arrivé; Jean-Pierre Frat; Stéphanie Ragot; Rémi Coudroy; Arnaud W Thille

doi:10.1186/s13613-023-01208-8

High-flow nasal cannula oxygen versus conventional oxygen therapy for acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Ann Intensive Care. 2023 Nov 23;13(1):114. doi: 10.1186/s13613-023-01208-8.

Authors

Sylvain Le Pape^{1

2}, Sigourney Savart³, François Arrivé³, Jean-Pierre Frat^{3

4}, Stéphanie Ragot⁴, Rémi Coudroy^{3

4}, Arnaud W Thille^{3

4}

Affiliations

¹ Médecine Intensive Réanimation, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Poitiers, 2 rue la Milétrie, 86021, Poitiers Cedex, France. sylvain.le.pape@univ-poitiers.fr.
² INSERM CIC 1402, IS-ALIVE Research group, University of Poitiers, Poitiers, France. sylvain.le.pape@univ-poitiers.fr.
³ Médecine Intensive Réanimation, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Poitiers, 2 rue la Milétrie, 86021, Poitiers Cedex, France.
⁴ INSERM CIC 1402, IS-ALIVE Research group, University of Poitiers, Poitiers, France.

Abstract

Background: The effectiveness of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNC) in patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19 remains uncertain. We aimed at assessing whether HFNC is associated with reduced risk of intubation or mortality in patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19 compared with conventional oxygen therapy (COT).

Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing HFNC vs. COT in patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19, published in English from inception to December 2022. Pediatric studies, studies that compared HFNC with a noninvasive respiratory support other than COT and those in which intubation or mortality were not reported were excluded. Two authors independently screened and selected articles for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. Fixed-effects or random-effects meta-analysis were performed according to statistical heterogeneity. Primary outcomes were risk of intubation and mortality across RCTs. Effect estimates were calculated as risk ratios and 95% confidence interval (RR; 95% CI). Observational studies were used for sensitivity analyses.

Results: Twenty studies were analyzed, accounting for 8383 patients, including 6 RCTs (2509 patients) and 14 observational studies (5874 patients). By pooling the 6 RCTs, HFNC compared with COT significantly reduced the risk of intubation (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.98; p = 0.02) and reduced length of stay in hospital. HFNC did not significantly reduce the risk of mortality (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.11; p = 0.40).

Conclusions: In patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19, HFNC reduced the need for intubation and shortened length of stay in hospital without significant decreased risk of mortality. Trial registration The study was registered on the International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) at https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ with the trial registration number CRD42022340035 (06/20/2022).

Keywords: Acute hypoxemic respiratory failure; COVID19; Conventional oxygen therapy; High-flow nasal cannula therapy; Intubation; Mortality.