Advances in TransplantationKidney transplantationHigh-flow Nasal Cannula Versus Noninvasive Ventilation for Treatment of Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure in Renal Transplant Recipients

- HFNC achieved outcomes similar to NIV in renal transplant recipients with acute respiratory failure.
- HFNC was associated with an increased number of ventilator-free days at day 28 and fewer complications.
- HFNC is a feasible alternative to NIV in renal transplant recipients with acute respiratory failure.

ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy compared with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) for the treatment of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure in renal transplant recipients.MethodsData were retrospectively collected from a tertiary intensive care unit (ICU) from July 1, 2011, to September 31, 2015. All renal recipients who had acute respiratory failure at that period of time were classified into the HFNC or NIV group depending on the initial form of respiratory support.ResultsA total of 38 patients were enrolled in this study. Twenty patients received HFNC and the other 18 received NIV as the initial respiratory support. The ICU mortality in the HFNC group was 5% (1 patient), compared with 22.2% (4 patients) in the NIV group (P = .083). The median length of the ICU stay was 12 days in the HFNC group, compared with 14 days in the NIV group (P = .297). The number of ventilator-free days at day 28 was significantly higher in the HFNC group than in the NIV group (26 ± 3 vs 21 ± 3; P < .001). The incidences of both pneumothorax (0% vs 22.2%; P = .042) and skin breakdown (0% vs 22.2%; P = .042) were significantly lower in the HFNC group.ConclusionsIn renal transplant recipients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure secondary to severe pneumonia, HFNC achieved outcomes similar to NIV. In addition, HFNC was associated with an increased number of ventilator-free days at day 28 and fewer complications.