Physiological effects of high-flow nasal cannula during sustained high-intensity exercise in healthy volunteers: a randomised crossover trial.

IF 4.3 3区医学 Q1 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM

ERJ Open Research Pub Date : 2025-02-03 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1183/23120541.00482-2024

Eduardo Moya-Gallardo, Patricio Garcia-Valdés, Consuelo Marambio-Coloma, Constanza Gutierrez-Escobar, Betsabeth Hernández-Vargas, Carolina Muñoz-Castro, Santiago Riquelme-Sánchez, Joel Moo-Millan, Roque Basoalto, Alejandro Bruhn, Orlando Diaz, L Felipe Damiani

{"title":"Physiological effects of high-flow nasal cannula during sustained high-intensity exercise in healthy volunteers: a randomised crossover trial.","authors":"Eduardo Moya-Gallardo, Patricio Garcia-Valdés, Consuelo Marambio-Coloma, Constanza Gutierrez-Escobar, Betsabeth Hernández-Vargas, Carolina Muñoz-Castro, Santiago Riquelme-Sánchez, Joel Moo-Millan, Roque Basoalto, Alejandro Bruhn, Orlando Diaz, L Felipe Damiani","doi":"10.1183/23120541.00482-2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has increased exercise capacity in patients with chronic respiratory diseases. However, it remains unknown whether HFNC impacts respiratory physiological variables during exercise. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of HFNC on respiratory physiological variables during sustained high-intensity exercise in healthy volunteers.Methods: We performed a single-centre, open-label, randomised crossover trial to compare HFNC (60 L·min-1) and Sham-HFNC (2 L·min-1) interventions during a constant work rate exercise (CWRET) through randomised order. The primary outcome was change in oesophageal pressure (ΔP oes), and the secondary outcomes were other variables of inspiratory effort, ventilation distribution, ventilatory variables and clinical assessment. We evaluated volunteers at seven time points (baseline=T0; CWRET=T1-T2-T3 (1, 4 and 6 min); cooldown period=T4-T5-T6 (1, 6 and 10 min)) in both interventions.Results: 14 healthy volunteers (50% women; age: 22 (21-27) years) were enrolled. Mean differences in ΔP oes decreased to favour the HFNC intervention compared to Sham-HFNC at T2 (-2.8 cmH2O; 95% CI -5.3 to -0.3), as well as the simplified oesophageal pressure-time product (sPTP) per minute at T2 (-86.1 cmH2O·s·min-1; 95% CI -146.2 to -26.1) and T3 (-79.9 cmH2O·s·min-1; 95% CI -142.3 to -17.6). The standard deviation of the Regional Ventilation Delay index was also lower with HFNC compared to Sham-HFNC (T1: -1.38; 95% CI -1.93 to -0.83; T2: -0.71; 95% CI -1.27 to -0.16). There was decreased dyspnoea to favour the HFNC, but sPTP per breath, spatial distribution ventilation indexes, ventilatory variables and clinical assessments were nonsignificant between interventions.Conclusion: HFNC intervention reduces respiratory effort and dyspnoea and improves temporal ventilation distribution in healthy volunteers during CWRET.","PeriodicalId":11739,"journal":{"name":"ERJ Open Research","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11788807/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERJ Open Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1183/23120541.00482-2024","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has increased exercise capacity in patients with chronic respiratory diseases. However, it remains unknown whether HFNC impacts respiratory physiological variables during exercise. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of HFNC on respiratory physiological variables during sustained high-intensity exercise in healthy volunteers.

Methods: We performed a single-centre, open-label, randomised crossover trial to compare HFNC (60 L·min^-1) and Sham-HFNC (2 L·min^-1) interventions during a constant work rate exercise (CWRET) through randomised order. The primary outcome was change in oesophageal pressure (ΔP _oes), and the secondary outcomes were other variables of inspiratory effort, ventilation distribution, ventilatory variables and clinical assessment. We evaluated volunteers at seven time points (baseline=T0; CWRET=T1-T2-T3 (1, 4 and 6 min); cooldown period=T4-T5-T6 (1, 6 and 10 min)) in both interventions.

Results: 14 healthy volunteers (50% women; age: 22 (21-27) years) were enrolled. Mean differences in ΔP _oes decreased to favour the HFNC intervention compared to Sham-HFNC at T2 (-2.8 cmH₂O; 95% CI -5.3 to -0.3), as well as the simplified oesophageal pressure-time product (sPTP) per minute at T2 (-86.1 cmH₂O·s·min^-1; 95% CI -146.2 to -26.1) and T3 (-79.9 cmH₂O·s·min^-1; 95% CI -142.3 to -17.6). The standard deviation of the Regional Ventilation Delay index was also lower with HFNC compared to Sham-HFNC (T1: -1.38; 95% CI -1.93 to -0.83; T2: -0.71; 95% CI -1.27 to -0.16). There was decreased dyspnoea to favour the HFNC, but sPTP per breath, spatial distribution ventilation indexes, ventilatory variables and clinical assessments were nonsignificant between interventions.

Conclusion: HFNC intervention reduces respiratory effort and dyspnoea and improves temporal ventilation distribution in healthy volunteers during CWRET.

查看原文本刊更多论文

高流量鼻插管对健康志愿者持续高强度运动的生理影响：一项随机交叉试验

高流量鼻插管（HFNC）可提高慢性呼吸系统疾病患者的运动能力。然而，HFNC是否会影响运动过程中的呼吸生理变量，目前尚不清楚。本研究旨在评估HFNC对健康志愿者持续高强度运动中呼吸生理指标的影响。方法：我们进行了一项单中心，开放标签，随机交叉试验，通过随机顺序比较恒定工作速率运动（CWRET）期间HFNC （60 L·min-1）和Sham-HFNC （2 L·min-1）干预。主要结局是食管压力变化（ΔP oes），次要结局是吸气力、通气分布、通气变量和临床评价等其他变量。我们在7个时间点对志愿者进行评估(基线=T0；CWRET=T1-T2-T3 (1,4,6 min)；两种干预的冷却时间分别为T4-T5-T6（1,6和10 min）。结果：14名健康志愿者(50%为女性；年龄：22岁（21-27岁）。与Sham-HFNC相比，ΔP的平均差异在T2 (-2.8 cmH2O；95% CI -5.3至-0.3)，以及T2时每分钟简化食管压力-时间积（sPTP） (-86.1 cmH2O·s·min-1；95% CI -146.2 ~ -26.1)和T3 (-79.9 cmH2O·s·min-1；95% CI为-142.3 ~ -17.6)。与Sham-HFNC相比，HFNC组的区域通气延迟指数的标准差也更低(T1: -1.38；95% CI -1.93 ~ -0.83；T2: -0.71;95% CI -1.27 ~ -0.16)。呼吸困难减少有利于HFNC，但每次呼吸sPTP、空间分布通气指数、通气变量和临床评估在干预之间无显著性差异。结论：HFNC干预可减少健康志愿者在cwrt期间的呼吸努力和呼吸困难，改善时间通气分布。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

ERJ Open Research Medicine-Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine

CiteScore

6.20

自引率

4.30%

发文量

273

审稿时长

8 weeks

期刊介绍： ERJ Open Research is a fully open access original research journal, published online by the European Respiratory Society. The journal aims to publish high-quality work in all fields of respiratory science and medicine, covering basic science, clinical translational science and clinical medicine. The journal was created to help fulfil the ERS objective to disseminate scientific and educational material to its members and to the medical community, but also to provide researchers with an affordable open access specialty journal in which to publish their work.