Cargando…

The value of ROX index in predicting the outcome of high flow nasal cannula: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: High flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy is widely employed in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) patients. However, the techniques for predicting HFNC outcome remain scarce. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched until April 20, 2021. We included the studies t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Junhai, Zhen, Jing, Yan, Beibei, Cao, Li, Li
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8851822/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35177091
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12931-022-01951-9
_version_ 1784652904392556544
author Junhai, Zhen
Jing, Yan
Beibei, Cao
Li, Li
author_facet Junhai, Zhen
Jing, Yan
Beibei, Cao
Li, Li
author_sort Junhai, Zhen
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: High flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy is widely employed in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) patients. However, the techniques for predicting HFNC outcome remain scarce. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched until April 20, 2021. We included the studies that evaluated the potential predictive value of ROX (respiratory rate-oxygenation) index for HFNC outcome. This meta-analysis determined sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic score, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and pooled area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve. RESULTS: We assessed nine studies with 1933 patients, of which 745 patients experienced HFNC failure. This meta-analysis found that sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, diagnostic score, and DOR of ROX index in predicting HFNC failure were 0.67 (95% CI 0.57–0.76), 0.72 (95% CI 0.65–0.78), 2.4 (95% CI 2.0–2.8), 0.46 (95% CI 0.37–0.58), 1.65(95% CI 1.37–1.93), and 5.0 (95% CI 4.0–7.0), respectively. In addition, SROC was 0.75 (95% CI 0.71–0.79). Besides, our subgroup analyses revealed that ROX index had higher sensitivity and specificity for predicting HFNC failure in COVID-19 patients, use the cut-off value > 5, and the acquisition time of other times after receiving HFNC had a greater sensitivity and specificity when compared to 6 h. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that ROX index could function as a novel potential marker to identify patients with a higher risk of HFNC failure. However, the prediction efficiency was moderate, and additional research is required to determine the optimal cut-off value and propel acquisition time of ROX index in the future. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021240607.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8851822
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88518222022-02-18 The value of ROX index in predicting the outcome of high flow nasal cannula: a systematic review and meta-analysis Junhai, Zhen Jing, Yan Beibei, Cao Li, Li Respir Res Review BACKGROUND: High flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy is widely employed in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) patients. However, the techniques for predicting HFNC outcome remain scarce. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched until April 20, 2021. We included the studies that evaluated the potential predictive value of ROX (respiratory rate-oxygenation) index for HFNC outcome. This meta-analysis determined sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic score, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and pooled area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve. RESULTS: We assessed nine studies with 1933 patients, of which 745 patients experienced HFNC failure. This meta-analysis found that sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, diagnostic score, and DOR of ROX index in predicting HFNC failure were 0.67 (95% CI 0.57–0.76), 0.72 (95% CI 0.65–0.78), 2.4 (95% CI 2.0–2.8), 0.46 (95% CI 0.37–0.58), 1.65(95% CI 1.37–1.93), and 5.0 (95% CI 4.0–7.0), respectively. In addition, SROC was 0.75 (95% CI 0.71–0.79). Besides, our subgroup analyses revealed that ROX index had higher sensitivity and specificity for predicting HFNC failure in COVID-19 patients, use the cut-off value > 5, and the acquisition time of other times after receiving HFNC had a greater sensitivity and specificity when compared to 6 h. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that ROX index could function as a novel potential marker to identify patients with a higher risk of HFNC failure. However, the prediction efficiency was moderate, and additional research is required to determine the optimal cut-off value and propel acquisition time of ROX index in the future. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021240607. BioMed Central 2022-02-17 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC8851822/ /pubmed/35177091 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12931-022-01951-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Review
Junhai, Zhen
Jing, Yan
Beibei, Cao
Li, Li
The value of ROX index in predicting the outcome of high flow nasal cannula: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title The value of ROX index in predicting the outcome of high flow nasal cannula: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full The value of ROX index in predicting the outcome of high flow nasal cannula: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr The value of ROX index in predicting the outcome of high flow nasal cannula: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed The value of ROX index in predicting the outcome of high flow nasal cannula: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short The value of ROX index in predicting the outcome of high flow nasal cannula: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort value of rox index in predicting the outcome of high flow nasal cannula: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8851822/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35177091
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12931-022-01951-9
work_keys_str_mv AT junhaizhen thevalueofroxindexinpredictingtheoutcomeofhighflownasalcannulaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT jingyan thevalueofroxindexinpredictingtheoutcomeofhighflownasalcannulaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT beibeicao thevalueofroxindexinpredictingtheoutcomeofhighflownasalcannulaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT lili thevalueofroxindexinpredictingtheoutcomeofhighflownasalcannulaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT junhaizhen valueofroxindexinpredictingtheoutcomeofhighflownasalcannulaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT jingyan valueofroxindexinpredictingtheoutcomeofhighflownasalcannulaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT beibeicao valueofroxindexinpredictingtheoutcomeofhighflownasalcannulaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT lili valueofroxindexinpredictingtheoutcomeofhighflownasalcannulaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis