YMEM
7214
S0196-0644(17)30324-4
10.1016/j.annemergmed.2017.03.028
American College of Emergency Physicians
Please see page 466 for the Editor’s Capsule Summary of this article.
Supervising editor: Henry E. Wang, MD, MS
Author contributions: OM and TN conceived the study, designed the trial, and supervised the conduct of the trial and data collection. OM, AM, US, NP, WC, TC, CP, and TN recruited the patients and managed the data, including quality control. PT interpreted the radiologic outcomes. OM analyzed the data. OM drafted the article, and all authors contributed substantially to its revision. OM takes responsibility for the paper as a whole.
All authors attest to meeting the four ICMJE.org authorship criteria: (1) Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND (2) Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND (3) Final approval of the version to be published; AND (4) Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Funding and support: By Annals policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article as per ICMJE conflict of interest guidelines (see www.icmje.org). Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Limited (Auckland, New Zealand) provided the equipment required for high-flow nasal cannula.
Trial registration number: TCTR20150727001
Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Limited had no involvement in the study conduct or data analysis or interpretation.
Readers: click on the link to go directly to a survey in which you can provide
feedback
to Annals on this particular article.
A
podcast
for this article is available at www.annemergmed.com.
Airway/original research
High-Flow Nasal Cannula Versus Conventional Oxygen Therapy in Emergency Department Patients With Cardiogenic Pulmonary Edema: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Onlak
Makdee
MD
a
Apichaya
Monsomboon
MD
a
Usapan
Surabenjawong
MD
a
Nattakarn
Praphruetkit
MD
a
Wansiri
Chaisirin
MD
a
Tipa
Chakorn
MD
a
Chairat
Permpikul
MD
b
Phakphoom
Thiravit
MD
c
Tanyaporn
Nakornchai
MD
a
∗
tanyaporn.ploy@gmail.com
a
Department of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Department of Emergency Medicine
Faculty of Medicine
Siriraj Hospital
Mahidol University
Bangkok
Thailand
b
Division of Critical Care, the Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Division of Critical Care, the Department of Internal Medicine
Faculty of Medicine
Siriraj Hospital
Mahidol University
Bangkok
Thailand
c
Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Department of Radiology
Faculty of Medicine
Siriraj Hospital
Mahidol University
Bangkok
Thailand
∗
Corresponding Author.
Study objective
High-flow nasal cannula is a new method for delivering high-flow supplemental oxygen for victims of respiratory failure. This randomized controlled trial compares high-flow nasal cannula with conventional oxygen therapy in emergency department (ED) patients with cardiogenic pulmonary edema.
Methods
We conducted an open-label randomized controlled trial in the ED of Siriraj Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand. Patients aged 18 years or older with cardiogenic pulmonary edema were randomly assigned to receive either conventional oxygen therapy or high-flow nasal cannula. The primary outcome was the respiratory rate 60 minutes postintervention.
Results
We enrolled 128 participants (65 in the conventional oxygen therapy and 63 in the high-flow nasal cannula groups). Baseline high-flow nasal cannula and conventional oxygen therapy mean respiratory rates were 28.7 breaths/min (SD 3.2) and 28.6 breaths/min (SD 3.5). Mean respiratory rates at 60 minutes postintervention were lower in the high-flow nasal cannula group (21.8 versus 25.1 breaths/min; difference 3.3; 95% confidence interval 1.9 to 4.6). No significant differences were found in the admission rate, ED and hospital lengths of stay, noninvasive ventilation, intubation, or mortality.
Conclusion
In patients with cardiogenic pulmonary edema in the ED, high-flow nasal cannula therapy may decrease the severity of dyspnea during the first hour of treatment.
KBJ00000000007456
2017-10-23T19:12:01
S300.2
S300
S0196-0644(17)30324-4
10.1016/j.annemergmed.2017.03.028
YMEM
0196-0644
7214
FLA
NON-CRC
UNLIMITED
NONE
2017-06-23T20:03:39Z
01960644/v70i4/S0196064417303244/main.xml
94167
MAIN
JA 5.4.0 ARTICLE
FULL-TEXT
01960644/v70i4/S0196064417303244/main.assets/gr4.sml
13780
IMAGE-THUMBNAIL
01960644/v70i4/S0196064417303244/main.assets/gr2.sml
12131
IMAGE-THUMBNAIL
01960644/v70i4/S0196064417303244/main.assets/gr3.sml
16095
IMAGE-THUMBNAIL
01960644/v70i4/S0196064417303244/main.assets/gr1.sml
13620
IMAGE-THUMBNAIL
01960644/v70i4/S0196064417303244/main.assets/gr4.jpg
35624
IMAGE-DOWNSAMPLED
01960644/v70i4/S0196064417303244/main.assets/gr2.jpg
60935
IMAGE-DOWNSAMPLED
01960644/v70i4/S0196064417303244/main.assets/gr3.jpg
42863
IMAGE-DOWNSAMPLED
01960644/v70i4/S0196064417303244/main.assets/gr1.jpg
57039
IMAGE-DOWNSAMPLED
01960644/v70i4/S0196064417303244/main.pdf
553161
MAIN
1.7 6.5
DISTILLED OPTIMIZED BOOKMARKED
01960644/v70i4/S0196064417303244/main.raw
39487
S0196-0644(17)X0010-3
YMEM
0196-0644
70
4
201710
A1
A66
e39
e42
449
606
S0196-0644(17)30324-4
10.1016/j.annemergmed.2017.03.028
465
472.e2
main.pdf
PDF
1.7