skip to main content

High-risk planned extubation after acute hypercapnic respiratory failure — SCE Respiratory MCQ

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

HardVentilatory SupportHigh-risk planned extubation after acute hypercapnic respiratory failureSCE Respiratory

A 72-year-old man with severe COPD and chronic heart failure has received invasive ventilation for 6 days following acute hypercapnic respiratory failure precipitated by community-acquired pneumonia. The infection and fluid overload have resolved. He is alert, haemodynamically stable and requires an FIO2 of 0.30. He has a strong cough, manageable secretions and a demonstrable cuff leak. During a 60-minute spontaneous breathing trial on low-level pressure support, his respiratory rate remains 24 breaths/min without distress and his rapid shallow breathing index is 72 breaths/min/L. At the end of the trial, arterial blood gas analysis shows pH 7.36, PaCO2 7.1 kPa and PaO2 10.2 kPa. The multidisciplinary team considers the spontaneous breathing trial successful and plans extubation. Which respiratory-support strategy is most appropriate immediately after extubation?

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

Reveal the answer and explanation

Correct answer: A — Planned extubation directly to prophylactic bilevel non-invasive ventilation

Explanation lettering: C = shown as A · D = shown as B · E = shown as C · A = shown as D · B = shown as E

Despite passing the spontaneous breathing trial, this patient is at high risk of post-extubation failure because he is older than 65 years, has chronic respiratory and cardiac disease, and remains hypercapnic during the trial. His preserved airway protection, effective cough, manageable secretions and cuff leak support extubation rather than continued intubation. Planned prophylactic bilevel NIV should therefore begin immediately after extubation; this is distinct from attempting NIV only after overt post-extubation failure has developed. A is inappropriate because waiting for acidosis converts prevention into rescue treatment; NIV for established unexpected post-extubation respiratory failure may delay necessary re-intubation. B is plausible because high-flow nasal oxygen is effective after extubation in lower-risk patients, but current ERS guidance favours NIV over high-flow therapy in patients at high risk of extubation failure. D is unnecessary after a successful trial when airway competence is adequate and a supported extubation strategy is available. E provides positive end-expiratory pressure but no inspiratory pressure support and is therefore less appropriate for a patient with persistent hypercapnia and limited ventilatory reserve.

Reference: BTS/ICS Guideline for the Ventilatory Management of Acute Hypercapnic Respiratory Failure in Adults (March 2016; correction June 2017) — https://brit-thoracic.org.uk/document-library/guidelines/niv/btsics-guideline-for-the-ventilatory-management-of-acute-hypercapnic-respiratory-failure-in-adults/ ERS clinical practice guidelines: high-flow nasal cannula in acute respiratory failure (2022) — https://publications.ersnet.org/content/erj/59/4/2101574