skip to main content

Planned extubation in a patient at high risk of extubation failure — SCE Respiratory MCQ

Instant feedback + full explanation. One question, done properly.

HardHigh-Flow Nasal CannulaPlanned extubation in a patient at high risk of extubation failureSCE Respiratory

A 74-year-old man with severe COPD (FEV1 36% predicted) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction has received invasive ventilation for 6 days because of pneumonia-associated acute-on-chronic respiratory failure. He has completed treatment for pneumonia and passes a 90-minute spontaneous breathing trial. At the end of the trial, he is alert and haemodynamically stable, with a respiratory rate of 23 breaths/min and rapid shallow breathing index of 64 breaths/min/L. Arterial blood gases on an FiO2 of 0.30 show pH 7.37, PaCO2 6.9 kPa, PaO2 9.4 kPa and bicarbonate 30 mmol/L. He has an effective cough, manageable secretions and a satisfactory cuff-leak test. There is no facial injury, vomiting or other contraindication to non-invasive ventilation. Which respiratory-support strategy is most appropriate immediately after planned extubation, with oxygen titrated to his prescribed target saturation range?

Educational content. Not a substitute for clinical judgement or local policy.

Reveal the answer and explanation

Correct answer: D — Extubate to prophylactic non-invasive ventilation, using high-flow nasal cannula during planned breaks

He is at high risk of extubation failure because he is older than 65 years, has severe chronic respiratory and cardiac disease, and remains hypercapnic at the end of the spontaneous breathing trial. His effective cough, manageable secretions, intact airway and haemodynamic stability exclude important contraindications to NIV. Prophylactic NIV should therefore begin immediately after extubation rather than being withheld until respiratory failure develops. HFNC during scheduled NIV breaks maintains heated, humidified high-flow support and is preferred to conventional oxygen during interruptions. In the HIGH-WEAN trial, immediate alternating NIV and HFNC reduced day-7 reintubation compared with HFNC alone in high-risk patients. A provides insufficient prophylaxis and incorrectly treats NIV principally as rescue therapy. B offers a comfortable alternative but is not the preferred sole support in a high-risk patient without an NIV contraindication. C supplies distending pressure but not the inspiratory pressure support required to unload respiratory muscles and augment ventilation in hypercapnic COPD. D correctly selects prophylactic NIV, but conventional oxygen during breaks forfeits the oxygenation, humidification and continuity-of-support advantages of HFNC. E best integrates his high-risk phenotype, persistent hypercapnia and need for planned NIV interruptions.

Reference: ERS clinical practice guidelines: high-flow nasal cannula in acute respiratory failure (14 April 2022) — https://publications.ersnet.org/content/erj/59/4/2101574 Effect of Postextubation High-Flow Nasal Oxygen With Noninvasive Ventilation vs High-Flow Nasal Oxygen Alone on Reintubation Among Patients at High Risk of Extubation Failure: A Randomized Clinical Trial (15 October 2019) — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31577036/ Official ERS/ATS clinical practice guidelines: noninvasive ventilation for acute respiratory failure (31 August 2017) — https://publications.ersnet.org/highwire_display/entity_view/node/540838/full