Objective To investigate the prognostic factors of severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease ( COPD) in elderly patients, and to guide the clinical assessment and appropriate interventions. Methods A prospective cohort study was carried out from May 1993 to December 2010. A total of 178 elderly patients with severe COPD were recruited for baseline survey, and followed up for the living conditions, whether used non-invasive ventilation, and causes of death. A survival analysis was performed on all patients stratified by lung function. The significant factors on survival rate were analyzed. Results In this cohort the survival rates were 49% and 12% in five and ten years, respectively. The important factors for prognosis were age [ relative risk( RR) = 1. 043, 95% confidence intervals( 95% CI = 1. 010-1. 050] , forced expired volume in one second ( FEV1 , RR = 0. 019, 95% CI = 0. 007-0. 052) , FEV1% pred ( RR = 1. 045, 95% CI = 1. 012-1. 079) , lung function grade ( RR = 2. 542, 95% CI = 1. 310-4. 931) , body mass index ( BMI, RR= 0. 945, 95% CI = 0. 895-0. 952) , and pulmonary heart disease ( RR = 1. 872, 95% CI = 1. 188- 2. 959) . In severe COPD, non-invasive ventilation ( NIV, RR = 1. 167, 95% CI = 0. 041-1. 674) , pulmonary heart disease ( RR = 3. 805, 95% CI = 1. 336-10. 836) , FEV1 ( RR = 0. 081, 95% CI = 1. 001-1. 168) , and arterial partial of oxygen ( PaO2 , RR=0. 956, 95% CI =0. 920-0. 993) were the independent predictors.The patients using NIV had longer survival than those without NIV. The 5 and 10 years survival rate in the patients with NIV were 78% and 50% , much higher than those without ventilation which were 30% and 25% , respectively. In extremely severe COPD, FEV1 ( RR=1. 059, 95% CI =1. 015-1. 105) , arterial partial of carbon dioxide ( PaCO2 , RR=1. 037, 95% CI = 1. 001-1. 074) , age ( RR= 1. 054, 95% CI = 1. 013-1. 096) and pulmonary heart disease ( RR = 1. 892, 95% CI = 1. 125-3. 181) were the independent predictors. Conclusions Age, BMI, FEV1 , PaO2 , PaCO2 , pulmonary heart disease, and NIV were prognostic factors in elderly patients with severe COPD. The prognostic factors between severe and extremely severe COPD were not identical. Patients with severe COPD should be given early intervention, including progressive nutritional support, and long-term home oxygen therapy combining with NIV.
Objective To explore the daytime variables which are predictive to nocturnal hyoxemia among COPD patients unqualified for long-term oxygen therapy ( LTOT) . Methods Forty-eight stable COPD patients with SaO2≥90% were enrolled in this study and regarded as patients unqualified for LTOT. All patients underwent lung function examination during daytime. Their nocturnal oxygen saturation was monitored with overnight pulse oximetry ( OPO) . ResultsDaytime oxygen saturation was positively correlated with nocturnal mean SaO2 ( r =0. 79, P lt;0. 0001) , and negatively correlated with time spend with saturation below 90% ( TB90) ( r = - 0. 75, P lt; 0. 0001) . No significant relationship was found between lung function parameters and nocturnal SaO2 . The patients with daytime oxygen saturation between 90% and 95% were more likely to have lower nocturnal oxygen saturation and longer TB90 ( P lt;0. 05) .Conclusions Daytime oxygen saturation may effectively predict the occurrence of nocturnal hyoxemia in stable COPD patients unqualified for LTOT. To reduce COPD complications and improve prognosis, we suggest a relative indication of LTOT for patients with daytime oxygen saturation between 90% and 95% and with nocturnal hyoxemia.
Objective To investigate the efficacy of basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF) combined with topical oxygen therapy for deep II degree burn wounds, by comparing the effects of bFGF combined with topical oxygen therapy and bFGF with routine therapy. Methods From February 2004 to July 2009, 85 patients with deep II degree burn wounds (117 wounds) were enrolled and divided into 4 groups randomly according to different treatments. There was no significant difference in sex, age, disease course, wound size, and wound treatment size among 4 groups (P gt; 0.05). In group A, 18 patients (28 wounds) were treated routinely; in group B, 23 patients (30 wounds) were treated with routine methods and topical oxygen therapy; in group C, 19 patients (25 wounds) were treated with routine methods and bFGF therapy; and in group D, 25 patients (34 wounds) were treated with routine methods and bFGF/topical oxygen therapy. Topical oxygen therapy was administered to the wound for 90 minutes per day for 3 weeks. The bFGF therapy was appl ied everyday (150 U/ cm2) for 3 weeks. Results All cases were followed up 6-12 months (9 months on average). The wound heal ing times in groups A, B, C, and D were (27.3 ± 6.6), (24.2 ± 5.8), (22.2 ± 6.8), and (18.2 ± 4.8) days, respectively; showing significant difference between group A and group D (P lt; 0.05). The wound heal ing rates in groups A, B, C, and Dwere 67.8% ± 12.1%, 85.1% ± 7.5%, 89.2% ± 8.3%, and 96.1% ± 5.6%, respectively; showing significant differences between group A and groups B, C, D (P lt; 0.05). The therapic effective rates in groups A, B, C, and D were 75%, 90%, 92%, and 100%, respectively; showing significant difference between group A and group D (P lt; 0.05). The Vancouver scar scale scoring of group D 6 months after treatment was better than that of group A (P lt; 0.05). Conclusion The bFGF combined with topical oxygen therapy can enhance deep II degree burn wound heal ing. Furthermore, the therapy method is simple and convenient.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the clinical efficacy and safety of hyperbaric oxygen therapy as adjunctive treatment for diabetic foot ulcers. MethodsSuch databases as The Cochrane Library (Issue 1, 2014), PubMed, EMbase, CBM, VIP, CNKI and WanFang Data were searched up to January 2014 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about hyperbaric oxygen therapy as adjunctive treatment for diabetic foot ulcers. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.2 software. ResultsFourteen RCTs involving 910 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that, hyperbaric oxygen therapy combined with routine therapy was superior to routine therapy alone regarding ulcer healing rates (RR=2.16, 95%CI 1.43 to 3.26, P=0.000 3), incidence of major amputation (RR=0.20, 95%CI 0.10 to 0.38, P < 0.000 01), reduction of ulcer area (MD=1.73, 95%CI 1.34 to 2.11, P < 0.000 01), and improvement of transcutaneous oxygen tension (MD=14.75, 95%CI 2.01 to 27.48, P=0.02). However, no significant difference was found between the two group in minor amputation rates (RR=0.70, 95%CI 0.24 to 2.11, P=0.53). In addition, neither relevant serious adverse reaction nor complications were reported when using hyperbaric oxygen therapy as adjunctive treatment. ConclusionCurrent evidence shows that hyperbaric oxygen therapy as adjunctive treatment could improve ulcer healing and reduce incidence of major amputation.
ObjectiveTo investigate the effects of two different oxygen therapies (oxygen time<4 h/d, oxygen flow>6 L/min versus oxygen time>4 h/d, oxygen flow<6 L/min) on conservative treatment of spontaneous pneumothorax by meta-analysis.MethodsThe following electronic databases as PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, WanFang Database and China National Knowledge Database were retrieved on computer for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of comparing two different oxygen therapies (oxygen time<4 h/d, oxygen flow>6 L/min versus oxygen time>4 h/d, oxygen flow<6 L/min) on conservative treatment of spontaneous pneumothorax. The retrieval time was from inception of each database to December 2017. Two reviewers independently screened literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed the methodological quality of the included studies. Then data were analyzed by RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsA total of 4 RCTs involving 226 patients were included. The meta-analysis showed that compared with lower oxygen flow (oxygen time>4 h/d, oxygen flow<6 L/min), the higher oxygen flow (oxygen time<4 h/d, oxygen flow>6 L/min) could obviously decrease the degree of pulmonary compression after oxygen therapy for 5 days (MD=–2.81, 95%CI –4.18 to –1.44, P<0.05), shorten duration of hospital stay (MD=–3.26, 95%CI –6.05 to –0.47, P<0.05) and duration of recruitment maneuvers (MD=–2.78, 95%CI –5.27 to –0.28, P<0.05), but there was no significant difference in oxygen partial pressure after oxygen therapy for 5 days (MD=10.68, 95%CI –7.03 to 28.39, P=0.24).ConclusionThe higher oxygen flow (oxygen time<4 h/d, oxygen flow>6 L/min) can obviously decrease the degree of pulmonary compression after oxygen therapy for 5 days, shorten duration of hospital stay and duration of recruitment maneuvers, but the results are influenced by the number and quality of RCT.
ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the efficacy of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNC) in post-extubation intensive care unit (ICU) patients.MethodsThe PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang, VIP Databases were searched for all published available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or cohort studies about HFNC therapy in post-extubation ICU patients. The control group was treated with conventional oxygen therapy (COT) or non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV), while the experimental group was treated with HFNC. Two reviewers separately searched the articles, evaluated the quality of the literatures, extracted data according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. RevMan5.3 was used for meta-analysis. The main outcome measurements included reintubation rate and length of ICU stay. The secondary outcomes included ICU mortality and hospital acquired pneumonia (HAP) rate.ResultsA total of 20 articles were enrolled. There were 3 583 patients enrolled, with 1 727 patients in HFNC group, and 1 856 patients in control group (841 patients with COT, and 1 015 with NIPPV). Meta-analysis showed that HFNC had a significant advantage over COT in reducing the reintubation rate of patients with postextubation (P<0.000 01), but there was no significant difference as compared with that of NIPPV (P=0.21). It was shown by pooled analysis of two subgroups that compared with COT/NIPPV, HFNC had a significant advantage in reducing reintubation rate in patients of postextubation (P<0.000 01). There was no significant difference in ICU mortality between HFNC and COT (P=0.38) or NIPPV (P=0.36). There was no significant difference in length of ICU stay between HFNC and COT (P=0.30), but there had a significant advantage in length of ICU stay between HFNC and NIPPV (P<0.000 01). It was shown by pooled analysis of two subgroups that compared with COT/NIPPV, HFNC had a significant advantage in length of ICU stay (P=0.04). There was no significant difference in HAP rate between HFNC and COT (P=0.61) or NIPPV (P=0.23).ConclusionsThere is a significant advantage to decrease reintubation rate between HFNC and COT, but there is no significant difference in ICU mortality, length of ICU stay or HAP rate. There is a significant advantage to decrease length of ICU stay between HFNC and NIPPV, but there is no significant difference in ICU mortality, reintubation rate or HAP rate.
ObjectiveTo compare the therapeutic effects of invasive-high-flow oxygen therapy (HFNC) and invasive-non-invasive ventilation (NIV) sequential strategies on severe respiratory failure caused by chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and explore the feasibility of HFNC after extubation from invasive ventilation for COPD patients with severe respiratory failure.MethodsFrom October 2017 to October 2019, COPD patients with type Ⅱ respiratory failure who received invasive ventilation were randomly assigned to a HFNC group and a NIV group at 1: 1 in intensive care unit (ICU), when pulmonary infection control window appeared after treatments. The patients in the HFNC group received HFNC, while the patients in the NIV group received NIV after extubation. The primary endpoint was treatment failure rate. The secondary endpoints were blood gas analysis and vital signs at 1 hour, 24 hours, and 48 hours after extubation, total respiratory support time after extubation, daily airway care interventions, comfort scores, and incidence of nasal and facial skin lesions, ICU length of stay, total length of stay and 28-day mortality after extubation.ResultsOne hundred and twelve patients were randomly assigned to the HFNC group and the NIV group. After secondary exclusion, 53 patients and 52 patients in the HFNC group and the NIV group were included in the analysis respectively. The treatment failure rate in the HFNC group was 22.6%, which was lower than the 28.8% in the NIV group. The risk difference of the failure rate between the two groups was –6.2% (95%CI –22.47 - 10.43, P=0.509), which was significantly lower than the non-inferior effect of 9%. Analysis of the causes of treatment failure showed that treatment intolerance in the HFNC group was significantly lower than that in the NIV group, with a risk difference of –38.4% (95%CI –62.5 - –3.6, P=0.043). One hour after extubation, the respiratory rate of both groups increased higher than the baseline level before extubation (P<0.05). 24 hours after extubation, the respiratory rate in the HFNC group decreased to the baseline level, but the respiratory rate in the NIV group was still higher than the baseline level, and the respiratory rate in the HFNC group was lower than that in the NIV group [(19.1±3.8) vs. (21.7±4.5) times per minute, P<0.05]. 48 hours after extubation, the respiratory rates in the two groups were not significantly different from their baseline levels. The average daily airway care intervention in the NIV group was 9 (5 - 12) times, which was significantly higher than the 5 (4 - 7) times in the HFNC group (P=0.006). The comfort score of the HFNC group was significantly higher than that of the NIV group (8.6±3.2 vs. 5.7±2.8, P= 0.022), while the incidence of nasal and facial skin lesions in the HFNC group was significantly lower than that in the NIV group (0 vs. 9.6%, P=0.027). There was no significant difference in dyspnea score, length of stay and 28-day mortality between the two groups.ConclusionsThe efficacy of invasive-HFNC sequential treatment on COPD with severe respiratory failure is not inferior to that of invasive-NIV sequential strategy. The two groups have similar treatment failure rates, and HFNC has better comfort and treatment tolerance.
Objective To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNC) and non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) induced by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods Sixty-eight patients with ARDS induced by COVID-19 in Wuhan Concorde Red Cross Hospital form January 25, 2020 to March 10, 2020 were included in the study. They were divided into an HFNC group (n=36) and an NIV group (n=36) according to the treatment. All patients received basic routine treatment, antiviral treatment and prevention therapy of secondary infection. The HFNC group received high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy, and the NIV group received NIV therapy. Then respiration and circulation parameters, comfort and tolerance, complications were compared between the two groups. Results After treatment for 3 days, 1 week, and 2 weeks in all patients with COVID-19 induced ARDS, respiratory rate (RR) was lower than that before therapy, arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), pulse oxygen saturation (SpO2), PaO2/FiO2 were higher than those before therapy (P<0.05), and therapeutic effect was time-dependent. But there was no significant difference of RR, PaO2, SpO2, PaO2/FiO2 between the HFNC group and the NIV group at different time points (P>0.05). After treatment for 2 weeks, the HFNC group patients' comfort, difficulty breathing, tolerance score were lower than the NIV group (P<0.05, P<0.01), the incidence rate of gastric distension and dry mouth etc. was lower than that in the NIV group (11.11% vs. 37.50%, P<0.05). There was no significant difference in rate of invasive mechanical ventilation or mortality between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusions HFNC and NIV can improve respiratory and circulatory parameters of patients with COVID-19 induced ARDS. HFNC has better comfort and tolerance, and can reduce related complications.
Hypoxia and other factors are related to cognitive impairment. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy can improve tissue oxygen supply to improve brain hypoxia. Based on the basic principle of hyperbaric oxygen therapy, hyperbaric oxygen has been widely used in recent years for cognitive impairment caused by stroke, brain injury, neurodegenerative disease, neuroinflammatory disease and metabolic encephalopathy. This article will review the basic mechanism of hyperbaric oxygen, and summarize and discuss the improvement of hyperbaric oxygen therapy on cognitive and brain diseases, in order to provide relevant reference for clinical treatment.
Objective To compare the sequential efficacy of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNC) with non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV). Methods Randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of NIV sequential invasive mechanical ventilation with HFNC were included in the Chinese Journal Full-text Database, VIP Journal database, Wanfang Database, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, PubMed, Cochrane Library and Embase. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan5.4 software. Results A total of 2404 subjects were included in 19 studies. Meta-analysis results showed that compared with NIV, HFNC had a statistically significant difference in reducing patients' re-intubation rate in invasive mechanical ventilation sequence [relative risk (RR)=0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50 - 0.86, Z=3.10, P=0.002]. HFNC showed statistically significant difference compared with NIV in reducing lung infection rate (RR=0.40, 95%CI 0.21 - 0.79, Z=2.67, P=0.008). HFNC was significantly different from NIV in terms of length of stay in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) (MD=–5.77, 95%CI –7.64 - –3.90, Z=6.05, P<0.00001). HFNC was significantly different from NIV in improving 24 h oxygenation index (MD=13.16, 95%CI 8.77 - 17.55, Z=5.87, P<0.00001). There was no significant difference in ICU mortality between HFNC and NIV (RR=0.70, 95%CI 0.45 - 1.08, Z=1.61, P=0.11). Conclusion Compared with NIV, sequential application of HFNC in invasive mechanical ventilation can improve the reintubation rate and pulmonary infection rate to a certain extent, reduce the length of ICU stay and improve the 24 h oxygenation index, while there is no difference in ICU mortality, which is worthy of clinical application.