Use of a gas-operated ventilator as a noninvasive bridging respiratory therapy in critically Ill COVID-19 patients in a middle-income country / Correction to: Use of a gas-operated ventilator as a noninvasive bridging respiratory therapy in critically Ill COVID-19 patients in a middle-income country

Abstract

During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a notable undersupply of respiratory support devices, especially in low- and middle-income countries. As a result, many hospitals turned to alternative respiratory therapies, including the use of gasoperated ventilators (GOV). The aim of this study was to describe the use of GOV as a noninvasive bridging respiratory therapy in critically ill COVID-19 patients and to compare clinical outcomes achieved with this device to conventional respiratory therapies. Retrospective cohort analysis of critically ill COVID-19 patients during the frst local wave of the pandemic. The fnal analysis included 204 patients grouped according to the type of respiratory therapy received in the frst 24 h, as follows: conventional oxygen therapy (COT), n=28 (14%); GOV, n=72 (35%); noninvasive ventilation (NIV), n=49 (24%); invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), n=55 (27%). In 72, GOV served as noninvasive bridging respiratory therapy in 42 (58%) of these patients. In the other 30 patients (42%), 20 (28%) presented clinical improvement and were discharged; 10 (14%) died. In the COT and GOV groups, 68% and 39%, respectively, progressed to intubation (P≤0.001). Clinical outcomes in the GOV and NIV groups were similar (no statistically signifcant diferences). GOV was successfully used as a noninvasive bridging respiratory therapy in more than half of patients. Clinical outcomes in the GOV group were comparable to those of the NIV group. These fndings support the use of GOV as an emergency, noninvasive bridging respiratory therapy in medical crises when alternative approaches to the standard of care may be justifable