High-Flow Oxygen Therapy vs. Conventional Oxygen Therapy on Invasive Mechanical Ventilation in COVID-19 Patients

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
high-flow-oxygen-therapy-vs-conventional-oxygen-therapy-on-invasive-mechanical-ventilation-in-covid-19-patients

Among patients with severe COVID-19, use of high-flow oxygen through a nasal cannula significantly decreased need for mechanical ventilation support and time to clinical recovery compared with conventional low-flow oxygen therapy.

Among 220 randomized patients, 199 were included in the analysis.

Intubation occurred in 34 (34.3%) randomized to high-flow oxygen therapy and in 51 (51.0%) randomized to conventional oxygen therapy.

The median time to clinical recovery within 28 days was 11 (IQR, 9-14) days in patients randomized to high-flow oxygen therapy vs 14 (IQR, 11-19) days in those randomized to conventional oxygen therapy.

Suspected bacterial pneumonia occurred in 13 patients (13.1%) randomized to high-flow oxygen and in 17 (17.0%) of those randomized to conventional oxygen therapy, while bacteremia was detected in 7 (7.1%) vs 11 (11.0%), respectively.

Read More