The effect of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy in patients after planned extubation remains inconclusive. We aimed to perform a rigorous and comprehensive systematic meta-analysis to robustly quantify the benefits of HFNC for patients after planned extubation by investigating postextubation respiratory failure and other outcomes. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from inception to August 2018. Two researchers screened studies and collected the data independently. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and crossover studies were included. The main outcome was postextubation respiratory failure. Ten studies (seven RCTs and three crossover studies; HFNC group: 856 patients; Conventional oxygen therapy (COT) group: 852 patients) were included. Compared with COT, HFNC may significantly reduce postextubation respiratory failure (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.41, 0.92; z = 2.38; P = 0.02) and respiratory rates (standardized mean differences (SMD), − 0.70; 95% CI, − 1.16, − 0.25; z = 3.03; P = 0.002) and increase PaO2 (SMD, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.04, 0.56; z = 2.23; P = 0.03). There were no significant differences in reintubation rate, length of ICU and hospital stay, comfort score, PaCO2, mortality in ICU and hospital, and severe adverse events between HFNC and COT group. Our meta-analysis demonstrated that compared with COT, HFNC may significantly reduce postextubation respiratory failure and respiratory rates, increase PaO2, and be safely administered in patients after planned extubation. Further large-scale, multicenter studies are needed to confirm our results.

The discrimination and calibration accuracy of prediction models tends to become poor over time. The performance of predictive models should be reevaluated periodically. The aim of this study was to reassess the discrimination of the six commonly used models for predicting 28-day mortality in patients with sepsis based on the Sepsis 3.0 criteria. Patient data were extracted from the fourth edition of the Medical Information Mart for Critical Care (MIMIC IV) database. The systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), Oxford Acute Severity of Illness Score (OASIS), Logistic Organ Dysfunction System (LODS), and Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II) and III (SAPS III) scores were calculated and collected. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was used to compare the discrimination abilities of the models using non-parametric Wilcoxon statistics. The Delong method was used to perform pairwise comparisons of the AUROCs of the models. Multiple subgroup analyses for age, body mass index, and sex were performed with regard to the 28-day mortality prediction of the models. A total of 12 691 patients were included. The mean age of the patients was 65.97 ± 15.77 years; 7673 patients (60.50%) were male. The mean SIRS, SOFA, OASIS, SAPS II, LODS, and SAPS III scores were higher in the non-survivor group than in the survivor group. The discrimination for 28-day mortality with the SAPS III (AUROC 0.812, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.802-0.822) and LODS (AUROC 0.804, 95% CI 0.743-0.765) models was superior to that of the SIRS (AUROC 0.575, 95% CI 0.562-0.589), SOFA (AUROC 0.612, 95% CI 0.598-0.626), OASIS (AUROC 0.753, 95% CI 0.742-0.764), and SAPS II (AUROC 0.754, 95% CI 0.743-0.765) models. The Youden index of the SAPS III model was 0.484, which was the highest among the models. Subgroup analyses showed similar results to the overall results. The discrimination for 28-day mortality with the SAPS III and LODS models was superior to that of the SIRS, SOFA, OASIS, and SAPS II models. The SAPS III model showed the best discrimination capacity for 28-day mortality compared with the other models.

Acute respiratory failure (ARF) is a common and life-threatening medical emergency in patients admitted to the hospital. Currently, there is a lack of large-scale evidence on the use of high-flow nasal cannulas (HFNC) in patients with ARF. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we evaluated whether there were differences between HFNC therapy and conventional oxygen therapy (COT) for treating patients with ARF. The EMBASE, Medline, and Wanfang databases and the Cochrane Library were searched. Two investigators independently collected the data and assessed the quality of each study. Randomized controlled trials that compared HFNC therapy with COT in patients with ARF were included. RevMan 5.3 was used to conduct the meta-analysis. Four studies that involved 703 patients with ARF were included, with 371 patients in the HFNC group and 332 patients in the COT group. In the overall estimates, there were no significant differences between the HFNC and COT groups in the rates of escalation of respiratory support (RR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.37, 1.27; z = 1.20, P = 0.23), intubation (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.55, 1.00; z = 1.95, P = 0.05), mortality (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.36, 1.88; z = 0.47, P = 0.64), or ICU transfer (RR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.57, 2.09; z = 0.26, P = 0.79) during ARF treatment. However, the subgroup analysis showed that HFNC therapy may decrease the rate of escalation of respiratory support (RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53, 0.97; z = 2.15, P = 0.03) and the intubation rate (RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53, 0.97; z = 2.15, P = 0.03) when ARF patients were treated with HFNC therapy for ≥24 h compared with COT. HFNC therapy was similar to COT in ARF patients. The subgroup analysis showed that HFNC therapy may decrease the rate of escalation of respiratory support and the intubation rate when ARF patients were treated with HFNC for ≥24 h compared with COT. Further high-quality, large-scale studies are needed to confirm our results.

Many single-center studies and meta-analyses demonstrate that therapeutic hypothermia (TH), in which the body temperature is maintained at 32–35°C, exerts significant neuroprotection and attenuates secondary intracranial hypertension after traumatic brain injury (TBI). In 2015, two well-designed multi-center, randomized controlled trials were published that did not show favorable outcomes with the use of TH in adult patients with TBI compared to normothermia treatment (NT). Therefore, we performed an updated meta-analysis to assess the effect of TH in adult patients with TBI. We reviewed the PubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Databases. We included randomized controlled trials that compared TH and NT in adult patients with TBI. Two reviewers assessed the quality of each study and independently collected the data. We performed the meta-analysis using the Cochrane Collaboration’s RevMan 5.3 software. We included 18 trials involving 2177 patients with TBI. There was no significant heterogeneity among the studies. TH could not decrease mortality at 3 months post-TBI (RR 0.95; 95 % CI 0.59, 1.55; z = 0.19, P = 0.85) or 6 months post-TBI (RR 0.96; 95 % CI 0.76, 1.23; z = 0.29, P = 0.77). There were no significant differences in unfavorable clinical outcomes when TH was compared to NT at 3 months post-TBI (RR 0.79; 95 % CI 0.56, 1.12; z = 1.31, P = 0.19) or 6 months post-TBI (RR 0.80; 95 % CI 0.63, 1.00; z = 1.92, P = 0.05). TH was associated with a significant increase in pneumonia (RR 1.51; 95 % CI 1.12, 2.03; z = 2.72, P = 0.006) and cardiovascular complications (RR 1.75; 95% CI 1.14, 2.70; z = 2.54, P = 0.01). Therapeutic hypothermia failed to demonstrate a decrease in mortality and unfavorable clinical outcomes at 3 or 6 months post-TBI. Additionally, TH might increase the risk of developing pneumonia and cardiovascular complications.

The risk of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is reduced when postpyloric enteral nutrition (EN) is administered compared to when gastric EN is administered in specific populations. In the present study, we tested the hypothesis that postpyloric EN is superior to gastric EN in reducing the incidence of VAP in elderly patients (age ≥ 75 years) who are admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and require mechanical ventilation. We performed a single-center randomized clinical trial involving elderly patients (age ≥ 75 years) who were admitted to the ICU and required mechanical ventilation. The patients were randomly assigned to either the postpyloric EN group or the gastric EN group. The primary outcome was the VAP rate. Of the 836 patients screened, 141 patients were included in the study (70 in the postpyloric EN group and 71 in the gastric EN group). The patients in the postpyloric EN group were 82.0 (75.0–99.0) years old (male 61.4%), and those in the gastric EN group were 82.0 (75.0–92.0) years old (male 63.4%). The Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores were 28.09 ± 6.75 in the postpyloric EN group and 27.80 ± 7.60 in the gastric EN group (P = 0.43). VAP was observed in 8 of 70 patients (11.4%) in the postpyloric EN group and in 18 of 71 patients (25.4%) in the gastric EN group, which resulted in a significant between-group difference (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.15–0.94; P = 0.04). In the postpyloric EN group, there were significant reductions in vomiting (12 patients in the postpyloric EN group vs 29 patients in the gastric EN group; OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.14–0.65; P = 0.002) and abdominal distension (18 patients in the postpyloric EN group vs 33 patients in the gastric EN group; OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.20–0.81; P = 0.01). No significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding mortality and other secondary outcomes. Our study demonstrated that, compared with gastric EN, postpyloric EN reduced the VAP rate among elderly patients who were admitted to the ICU and required mechanical ventilation. Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR-IPR-16008485 . Registered on 17 May 2016.