ATS 2021 will feature presentations of original research from accepted abstracts. Mini Symposia and Thematic Poster Sessions are abstract based sessions.
Please use the form below to browse scientific abstracts and case reports accepted for ATS 2021. Abstracts presented at the ATS 2021 will be published in the Online Abstract Issue of the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Volume 203, May 3, 2021.
Search Tips:
- Use the keyword search to search by keyword or author's name.
- Filter your search results by selecting the checkboxes that apply.
- Click on "Clear" to clear the form and start a new search. .
Search results will display below the form.
Outcomes with High Flow Nasal Therapy vs Invasive Mechanical Ventilation in COVID-19 Patients with Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure
Session Title
TP51 - TP051 COVID: LUNG INFECTION, MULTIORGAN FAILURE, AND CARDIOVASCULAR
Abstract
A2637 - Outcomes with High Flow Nasal Therapy vs Invasive Mechanical Ventilation in COVID-19 Patients with Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure
Author Block: J. M. Chowdhury1, M. Patel1, Z. L. Dorey-Stein1, R. M. Marron1, N. Mills1, M. Zheng1, O. Abramian1, H. Zhao2, N. Patlakh3, N. Marchetti1, G. J. Criner1, Temple University COVID-19 Research Group; 1Thoracic Medicine and Surgery, Temple University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, United States, 2Clinical Sciences, Lewis Katz School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States, 3Project Management, Lewis Katz School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Rationale:
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has provoked an unprecedented global pandemic. Invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) rates in COVID-19 have been reported to be from 2.3% to 33%. The wide range in reported intubation rates is attributed in part to diverging institutional practices for the care of patients presenting with hypoxemic respiratory failure. The role of high flow nasal therapy (HFNT) in the treatment of COVID-19 has been controversial and underreported.
Objectives:
To report a retrospective analysis comparing the outcomes of patients treated with HFNT and IMV for hypoxemic respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19.
Methods:
This was an analysis of consecutive patients admitted to Temple University Hospital between March 10, 2020, and May 17, 2020, for moderate to severe hypoxemic respiratory failure from COVID-19 pneumonia. Patients were divided into three groups: IMV group-not placed on HFNT prior to intubation. HFNT group-received only HFNT. HFNT to intubation group-received HFNT prior to intubation. Comparisons were made between demographics, baseline laboratory values, and outcomes.
Results:
1396 patients admitted to Temple University Hospital between March 10, 2020, and May 17, 2020 with suspected COVID-19 infection were retrospectively screened for this study. 837 patients tested positive for COVID-19 by nasopharyngeal RT-PCR or deemed positive based on clinical features. There were no statistically significant differences in terms of demographics between all three groups. However, the intubation and HFNT to intubation groups had a higher incidence of malignancy compared to the HFNT only group. There was a higher incidence of smoking in the intubation group (59.2%) and HFNT to intubation group (53.7%) compared to HFNT only group (29.2%). Laboratory data were similar between all three groups besides admission BUN/creatinine. In terms of therapies, high-dose steroids were administered more frequently to patients in the HFNT (84.3%) and HFNT to intubation (90.2%) groups compared to the intubated group (56.5%). Overall, 49 (28.1%) were intubated, 84 (48.2%) were treated with HFNT only, and 41 (23.5%) progressed from HFNT to intubation. The mortality was 36.7% in the intubation group, 6% in the HFNT only group, and 43.9% in the HFNT to intubation group. Overall mortality was 25.7%.
Conclusion:
Our institutional decision to utilize HFNT as the primary treatment for moderate to severe hypoxemic respiratory failure led to a low intubation rate thus reducing overall morbidity and mortality. In the appropriate clinical context HFNT should be the considered the oxygen modality of choice in moderate to severe hypoxemic respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 pneumonia.
Author Block: J. M. Chowdhury1, M. Patel1, Z. L. Dorey-Stein1, R. M. Marron1, N. Mills1, M. Zheng1, O. Abramian1, H. Zhao2, N. Patlakh3, N. Marchetti1, G. J. Criner1, Temple University COVID-19 Research Group; 1Thoracic Medicine and Surgery, Temple University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, United States, 2Clinical Sciences, Lewis Katz School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States, 3Project Management, Lewis Katz School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Rationale:
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has provoked an unprecedented global pandemic. Invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) rates in COVID-19 have been reported to be from 2.3% to 33%. The wide range in reported intubation rates is attributed in part to diverging institutional practices for the care of patients presenting with hypoxemic respiratory failure. The role of high flow nasal therapy (HFNT) in the treatment of COVID-19 has been controversial and underreported.
Objectives:
To report a retrospective analysis comparing the outcomes of patients treated with HFNT and IMV for hypoxemic respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19.
Methods:
This was an analysis of consecutive patients admitted to Temple University Hospital between March 10, 2020, and May 17, 2020, for moderate to severe hypoxemic respiratory failure from COVID-19 pneumonia. Patients were divided into three groups: IMV group-not placed on HFNT prior to intubation. HFNT group-received only HFNT. HFNT to intubation group-received HFNT prior to intubation. Comparisons were made between demographics, baseline laboratory values, and outcomes.
Results:
1396 patients admitted to Temple University Hospital between March 10, 2020, and May 17, 2020 with suspected COVID-19 infection were retrospectively screened for this study. 837 patients tested positive for COVID-19 by nasopharyngeal RT-PCR or deemed positive based on clinical features. There were no statistically significant differences in terms of demographics between all three groups. However, the intubation and HFNT to intubation groups had a higher incidence of malignancy compared to the HFNT only group. There was a higher incidence of smoking in the intubation group (59.2%) and HFNT to intubation group (53.7%) compared to HFNT only group (29.2%). Laboratory data were similar between all three groups besides admission BUN/creatinine. In terms of therapies, high-dose steroids were administered more frequently to patients in the HFNT (84.3%) and HFNT to intubation (90.2%) groups compared to the intubated group (56.5%). Overall, 49 (28.1%) were intubated, 84 (48.2%) were treated with HFNT only, and 41 (23.5%) progressed from HFNT to intubation. The mortality was 36.7% in the intubation group, 6% in the HFNT only group, and 43.9% in the HFNT to intubation group. Overall mortality was 25.7%.
Conclusion:
Our institutional decision to utilize HFNT as the primary treatment for moderate to severe hypoxemic respiratory failure led to a low intubation rate thus reducing overall morbidity and mortality. In the appropriate clinical context HFNT should be the considered the oxygen modality of choice in moderate to severe hypoxemic respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 pneumonia.
