ABSTRACT
Background Both continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and high-flow nasal oxygenation (HFNO) have been recommended for acute respiratory failure in COVID-19. However, uncertainty exists regarding effectiveness and safety.
Methods In the Recovery-Respiratory Support multi-center, three-arm, open-label, adaptive, randomized controlled trial, adult hospitalized patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19, deemed suitable for treatment escalation, were randomly assigned to receive CPAP, HFNO, or conventional oxygen therapy. Comparisons were made between each intervention and conventional oxygen therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of tracheal intubation or mortality within 30-days.
Results Over 13-months, 1272 participants were randomized and included in the analysis (380 (29.9%) CPAP; 417 (32.8%) HFNO; 475 (37.3%) conventional oxygen therapy). The need for tracheal intubation or mortality within 30-days was lower in the CPAP group (CPAP 137 of 377 participants (36.3%) vs conventional oxygen therapy 158 of 356 participants (44.4%); unadjusted odds ratio 0.72; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.96, P=0.03). There was no difference between HFNO and conventional oxygen therapy (HFNO 184 of 414 participants (44.4%) vs conventional oxygen therapy 166 of 368 participants (45.1%); unadjusted odds ratio 0.97; 95% CI 0.73 to 1.29, P=0.85).
Conclusions CPAP, compared with conventional oxygen therapy, reduced the composite outcome of intubation or death within 30 days of randomisation in hospitalized adults with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19. There was no effect observed, compared with conventional oxygen therapy, with the use of HFNO.
(Funded by the UK National Institute for Health Research; ISRCTN 16912075).
Competing Interest Statement
This study is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) [COVID-19-RSC]. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. Professor Perkins is supported as an NIHR senior investigator, through the NIHR West Midlands Applied Research Collaboration. Professor McAuley is programme director for the NIHR Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation programme. Professor Perkins and Dr Connolly, are directors of research for the Intensive Care Society. Professor McAuley was, until recently (term ended June 2021), a director of research for the Intensive Care Society Professor Dark is NIHR CRN National Specialty Cluster Lead and is also supported by the Manchester NIHR Biomedical Research Centre. Mrs Devrell reports personal fees from the NIHR for patient and public involvement work related to the study. Outside of the submitted work, the following conflicts of interest were declared. Dr Connolly reports grant funding from the NIHR and personal fees from Fisher and Paykel. Dr Dave reports personal fees from Chesei. Professor De Soyza reports grant support, speakers fees, advisory board fees and conference attendance support from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Chiesi, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Forest labs, Novartis, Insmed, and Zambon. Professor Hart reports grant funding from the NIHR, UK Research and Innovation, with unrestricted grants and equipment from Philips-Respironics, Fisher and Paykel, and Resmed; financial support from Philips for development of the MYOTRACE technology that has patent approved in Europe and US; personal fees for lecturing from Philips-Respironics, Philips, Resmed, and Fisher and Paykel; and institutional funding for his role on the Philips Global Medical Advisory Board. Dr Messer reports personal fees from Fisher and Paykel. Dr Parekh reports grant funding from the NIHR and Medical Research Council UK Research and Innovation. Professor Steiner reports personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline. Professor McAuley reports personal fees from consultancy for GlaxoSmithKline, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, Novartis, SOBI and Eli Lilly, and from sitting on DMECs for trials undertaken by Vir Biotechnology and Faron Pharmaceuticals. Professor McAuley also reports grant funding to his institution from several funders (NIHR, Wellcome Trust, Innovate UK, Medical Research Council, and Northern Ireland Health and Social Research and Development division) for studies in patients with ARDS and COVID-19, and a patent (US8962032) issued to his institution as a treatment for inflammatory disease. The remaining authors report no conflicts of interest.
Clinical Trial
ISRCTN 16912075
Clinical Protocols
https://trialsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13063-020-04617-3
Funding Statement
This study is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) [COVID-19-RSC]. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. Professor Perkins is supported as an NIHR senior investigator, through the NIHR West Midlands Applied Research Collaboration. Professor McAuley is programme director for the NIHR Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation programme. Professor Perkins and Dr Connolly, are directors of research for the Intensive Care Society. Professor McAuley was, until recently (term ended June 2021), a director of research for the Intensive Care Society Professor Dark is NIHR CRN National Specialty Cluster Lead and is also supported by the Manchester NIHR Biomedical Research Centre.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
London-Brighton & Sussex Research Ethics Committee
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All the data are included in the manuscript and available upon requests.