Diagnostic Strategy for Hematology and Oncology Patients with Acute Respiratory Failure: Randomized Controlled Trial

Élie Azoulay(Intensive Care Society), Djamel Mokart(Institut Paoli-Calmettes), Jérôme Lambert, Virginie Lemiale(Hôpital Cochin), Antoine Rabbat(Hotel Dieu Hospital), Achille Kouatchet, François Vincent(Hôpital Avicenne), Didier Gruson(Hôpital Pellegrin), Fabrice Bruneel(Hôpital André Mignot), Géraldine Epinette-Branche(Intensive Care Society), Ariane Lafabrie(Intensive Care Society), Rébecca Hamidfar-Roy(Hôpital Albert Michallon), Christophe Cracco(Sorbonne Université), B. Renard(Centre Hospitalier Départemental Vendée), Jean-Marie Tonnelier(Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire de Brest), François Blot(Institut Gustave Roussy), Sylvie Chevret(Institut Paoli-Calmettes), Benoı̂t Schlemmer(Intensive Care Society)
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
June 25, 2010
Cited by 301

Abstract

RATIONALE: Respiratory events are common in hematology and oncology patients and manifest as hypoxemic acute respiratory failure (ARF) in up to half the cases. Identifying the cause of ARF is crucial. Fiberoptic bronchoscopy with bronchoalveolar lavage (FO-BAL) is an invasive test that may cause respiratory deterioration. Recent noninvasive diagnostic tests may have modified the risk/benefit ratio of FO-BAL. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether FO-BAL in cancer patients with ARF increased the need for intubation and whether noninvasive testing alone was not inferior to noninvasive testing plus FO-BAL. METHODS: We performed a multicenter randomized controlled trial with sample size calculations for both end points. Patients with cancer and ARF of unknown cause who were not receiving ventilatory support at intensive care unit admission were randomized to early FO-BAL plus noninvasive tests (n = 113) or noninvasive tests only (n = 106). The primary end point was the number of patients needing intubation and mechanical ventilation. The major secondary end point was the number of patients with no identified cause of ARF. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The need for mechanical ventilation was not significantly greater in the FO-BAL group than in the noninvasive group (35.4 vs. 38.7%; P = 0.62). The proportion of patients with no diagnosis was not smaller in the noninvasive group (21.7 vs. 20.4%; difference, -1.3% [-10.4 to 7.7]). CONCLUSIONS: FO-BAL performed in the intensive care unit did not significantly increase intubation requirements in critically ill cancer patients with ARF. Noninvasive testing alone was not inferior to noninvasive testing plus FO-BAL for identifying the cause of ARF. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00248443).


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis