.
.
Summary: High-Velocity Nasal Insufflation VS Noninvasive Positive Pressure Ventilation for COPD Exacerbation
Topic: Primary Support
David P. Yamane MD, Christopher W. Jones MD, R. Gentry Wilkerson MD, Joshua J. Oliver MD, MPH, Soroush Shahamatdar BS, Aditya Loganathan BS, Taylor Bolden BS, Ryan Heidish BS, Connor L. Kelly MD, Amy Bergeski MHA, RRT/NPS, Jessica S. Whittle MD, PhD, George C. Dungan II MPhil (Med), Richard Maisiak PhD, Andrew C. Meltzer MD, MS
First published: 11 December 2024
Presented at the Society of Critical Care Medicine’s (SCCM) 2024 Critical Care Congress, Phoenix, AZ, January 2024 (Star Research Award); and the Government Services Annual Meeting of the American College of Emergency Physicians, San Diego, CA, April 2024 (awarded first place for original research).
Yamane and colleagues conducted a randomized, multicenter study to evaluate the efficacy of high velocity therapy or HVNI (Precision Flow; Vapotherm, Inc, Exeter, NH) compared to noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV), for treatment of patients with COPD presenting with moderate to severe acute hypercapnic respiratory failure.
The study included 68 adult patients presenting to the emergency department with known or suspected COPD with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure with an initial PCO2 of 60 mmHg or higher and pH of 7.0-7.35 on blood gas. Exclusions included need for emergent intubation, severe metabolic derangements, primary condition of congestive heart failure, and presence of significant pneumonia on chest imaging.
Treatment failure occurred in 4 of 36 subjects (11.1%) in the high velocity therapy group and 6 of 32 subjects (18.8%) in the NIPPV group (p=0.498). The data demonstrated that over 4 hours, the absolute change in PCO2 was similar between the 2 groups (HVNI: -10.6 ± 13.3mmHg vs NIPPV: -8.5 ± 14.1mmHg, p=0.563). The mean PCO2 fell from 77.8 ± 13.6mmHg to 68.7± 13.9mmHg in the high velocity therapy cohort and 76.5 ± 13.6mmHg to 69.0 ± 20.3mmHg in the NIPPV cohort.
The authors concluded that the study results suggest that with similar physiological benefit, treatment with high velocity therapy is a reasonable alternative to NIPPV and may lead to reduced rates of intubation for patients unable to tolerate NIPPV.
Learn More
Download your free Whitepaper: High Velocity Nasal Insufflation: Monitoring Patients for Optimal Care
All Clinical Research
Go back to the Clinical Research table of contents
CAUTION: US Federal law restricts this device to sale by or on the order of a physician. Indications, contraindications, warnings, and instructions for use can be found in the product labelling supplied with each device or at https://vapotherm.com/resources/support/precision-flow-reference/. For spontaneously breathing patients. High Velocity Therapy (HVT) does not provide total ventilatory requirements of the patient. It is not a ventilator. Decisions surrounding patient care depend on the physician’s professional judgment in consideration of all available information for the individual case, including escalation of care depending on patient condition.