• Users Online: 456
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
Year : 2022  |  Volume : 23  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 68-72

Pros of prone positioning with high-flow nasal oxygenation in morbidly obese patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome: A retrospective analysis

1 Department of Anesthesia, GCS Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre, Hospital and Research Centre, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India
2 Department of Anesthesia, UNMICRC, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India
3 Department of Anesthesia, Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi, India
4 Department of Anesthesiology, Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi, India
5 CVTS, UNMICRC, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India
6 Research, UNMICRC, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Visharad Trivedi
Department of Anesthesia, UNMICRC, Ahmedabad, Gujarat
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/TheIAForum.TheIAForum_134_21

Rights and Permissions

Background: Coronavirus disease-2019 has rapidly spread globally and has become a global public health crisis. Obesity is the most frequent comorbidity exhibited by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2. Many studies have highlighted the benefits of prone position (PP) with high flow nasal oxygenation (HFNC) in patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). This further delay intubation, reduce intensive care unit (ICU) stay and decreases overall morbidity. Methods: In this study, we analyzed case record data of morbidly obese patients (body mass index >35Kg/m2) with moderate-to-severe ARDS over 3 months. We evaluated the efficacy of early application of PP with HFNO in morbidly obese patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 ARDS on PaO2/FiO2 ratio. Results: A total of 24 morbidly obese patients were included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups: Group F (those who were intubated) and Group S (who did not require invasive mechanical ventilation). One hour of PP along with the use of HFNO, the P/F ratio was significantly higher in Group S (78.23 ± 7.16) than in Group F (63.58 ± 15.40) (P < 0.05). The ICU stay was longer in patients who required invasive mechanical ventilation, 17.33±2.52 days in Group F as compared to 8.11±1.05 days in Group S. Conclusion: PP with HFNO seems safe in morbidly obese patients and may improve oxygenation more than in nonobese patients. It is important to stress the necessity to start out postural treatment as early because the patient's clinical condition permits. PP with HFNO might avoid tracheal intubation and its inherent risks and prove beneficial in resource-limited scenarios.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded65    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal