PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Kelly, Shannon E.
AU  - Wells, George A.
TI  - Noninvasive ventilation strategies for patients with severe or critical COVID-19: A rapid review of clinical outcomes
AID  - 10.1101/2022.05.25.22275586
DP  - 2022 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2022.05.25.22275586
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/05/26/2022.05.25.22275586.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/05/26/2022.05.25.22275586.full
AB  - Objectives To examine whether high flow nasal oxygen (HFNO), continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), or noninvasive ventilation (NIV) strategies impact mortality, the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), or hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay compared to standard oxygen therapy (SOT) or each other in patients with severe or critical COVID-19 with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.Methods A rapid review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) identified through published systematic and rapid reviews supplemented with a search of bibliographic databases. RCTs were eligible if they compared HFNO, CPAP, or NIV to SOT or another ventilation strategy. Studies were screened, selected, and extracted by a single reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. We assessed risk of bias of included studies using the Cochrane ‘Risk of bias’ tool and used the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach to judge the certainty of the evidence for mortality, need for IMV, and hospital and ICU length of stay. We sought RCT evidence for non-COVID-19 patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and acute respiratory distress to inform additional comparisons and to supplement the available data for COVID-19.Results A total of 5 RCTs comparing ventilation strategies in patients with severe or critical COVID-19 were included. Patient and study characteristics were extracted and evidence and certainty of evidence assessments were completed for comparisons of HFNO and CPAP to standard oxygen therapy and NIV and CPAP to HFNO. An additional 22 RCTs of non-COVID-19 patients were also included and considered.Results from meta-analysis suggest reductions in mortality and IMV with HFNO (RR mortality 0.87 (0.66-1.13), IMV 0.89 (0.77-1.03); low quality evidence) or CPAP (RR mortality 0.87 (0.64-1.18) low quality evidence, IMV 0.81 (0.67-0.98) moderate quality evidence) compared to SOT. Helmet NIV may reduce IMV (RR 0.69 (0.43-1.09)) and CPAP may reduce IMV (RR 0.69 (0.43-1.09)) and hospital (1.67 days fewer (5.43 fewer-2.09 more) or ICU length of stay (1.02 days fewer (3.97 fewer-1.93 more)) compared to HFNO (low quality evidence).Conclusions This rapid systematic review highlights the available evidence to support the use of noninvasive ventilation strategies including high flow nasal oxygen, noninvasive ventiltaion (e.g., BiPAP), or CPAP in hospitalized patients with severe or critical COVID-19 and acute hypoxemic respiratory failure who do not need emergent intubation. Findings based on moderate to very low certainty evidence suggest that noninvasive ventilation may be considered as an alternative to standard oxygen therapy to reduce hypoxemia and dyspnea. Additional high quality RCTs are warranted to reduce uncertainty and to fill in important knowledge gaps.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThe Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research Evidence Alliance (SPOR EA) is supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) under the Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR) initiative. This project was funded in part by the World Health Organization (PO 202642154). Project funding was augmented through existing research funds held at the University of Ottawa. All review activities and the interpretation of findings were conducted independently from the funders.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.AHRFacute hypoxemic respiratory failureARDSacute respiratory distress syndromeBiPAPbilevel positive airway pressureCPAPcontinuous positive airway pressureHFNChigh flow nasal cannulaHFNOhigh flow nasal oxygenIMVinvasive mechanical ventilationMAmeta-analysisNIVnon-invasive mechanical ventilationNMAnetwork meta-analysisNPPVnegative positive pressure ventilationROBrisk of biasRCTrandomized controlled trialRRrapid reviewSOTstandard oxygen therapySRsystematic reviewWHOWorld Health Organization