Comparison Physiological Effects According to Preoxygenation Method Using EIT

Plain-language summary

Hypoxemia during endotracheal intubation is one of this procedure's most frequent and severe complications, which can lead to cardiac arrest and other adverse outcomes. Although various studies have been conducted to ensure the safety of endotracheal intubation, most of them have focused on the physiological changes during the procedure in surgical settings, where general anesthesia is administered to healthy subjects. However, the physiological characteristics of critically ill patients who require endotracheal intubation in the intensive care unit (ICU) may differ from those of healthy subjects. When comparing the oxygen saturation-dissociation curve of healthy subjects and critically ill patients, the latter show a steeper decline in oxygen saturation (SpO2) below 90% when hypoxemia occurs. Clinically, it is difficult to maintain or recover oxygen saturation when it drops. Therefore, preoxygenation is also essential for critically ill patients with a relatively small lung reservoir, as it can help maintain higher and longer oxygen saturation during endotracheal intubation. For this reason, apneic oxygenation was proposed in the 1950s as a method of oxygen delivery during general anesthesia for surgery, and clinical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) applying it to critically ill patients in the ICU have been conducted since 20 years ago. In an observational study by Macamn et al., the adjusted odds ratio (OR) of a bag valve mask was 1, while that of a high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) was 5.75 and that of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) was 0.10 when different preoxygenation methods were used. n FLORARI 2, a large-scale clinical RCT comparing NIV and HFNC with or without apneic oxygenation, NIV was significantly more effective than HFNC in reducing severe hypoxemia. Based on these previous studies, the investigators can infer that supplying oxygen during laryngoscopy is not very effective in preventing hypoxemia in critically ill patients. However, there is no guideline on which device to choose for preoxygenation in the ICU, and NIV or HFNC are selected according to the operator's preference. This is because few studies have examined the physiological effects of these devices on patients. Therefore, in this study, the investigators aim to compare the clinical outcomes and adverse events of NIV and HFNC as preoxygenation methods for endotracheal intubation in critically ill patients with acute respiratory failure and to evaluate their physiological effects using electrical impedance tomography.

Who can participate

What they're measuring

Trial details