PulseTrendingJournal ClubResearchersJournalsExplore
Instagram
HomeTrendingJournal ClubExplore
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
January 6, 2026The Egyptian Journal of Critical Care MedicineOpen Access

Outcome of high flow nasal cannula versus non-invasive positive pressure ventilation in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Authors

MKMahmoud M. KenawyHAHatem H. AlatroushHZHanan Zaghla

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Overview

Trial evaluates mortality and intubation rates in acute hypoxemic patients using HFNC and NIV, indicating similar outcomes.

Key Points

  • This research aims to compare the effectiveness of high flow nasal cannula and non-invasive ventilation in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.
  • Randomized trial involving 100 patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.
  • Participants received either high flow nasal cannula or non-invasive positive pressure ventilation treatments.
  • Patients monitored for intubation rates, ICU stay duration, and 28-day mortality.
  • No significant difference in intubation rates between HFNC (50%) and NIPPV (46%) groups.
  • Average ICU stay was similar between HFNC (8.76 days) and NIPPV (8.6 days).
  • 28-day mortality rates were comparable: 42% in HFNC and 38% in NIPPV.

Cite This Study

Kenawy et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/695d8e503483e917927a5547https://doi.org/10.1007/s44349-025-00030-4
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share