Comparison of high-flow nasal cannula and noninvasive ventilation in COVID-19-related hypoxemic respiratory failure: a retrospective observational study
Retrospective observational study compares clinical outcomes of HFNC and NIV in COVID-19-induced hypoxemia, suggesting similar effectiveness.
Key Points
This study aims to compare the effectiveness and safety of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in patients with COVID-19-related hypoxemic respiratory failure.
Retrospective observational study involving 50 patients with COVID-19-induced hypoxemic respiratory failure.
25 patients received HFNC and 25 received NIV, with baseline characteristics and outcomes analyzed.
Safety outcomes, physiological responses, and clinical data were compared between both groups.
No significant differences in in-hospital mortality (P = 0.248), ICU and hospital length of stay, or need for invasive mechanical ventilation.
Respiratory rate and serum lactate levels were lower in the HFNC group, but changes between groups were not statistically significant.
Safety outcomes, including complications like acute kidney injury and pneumothorax, were similar between both modalities.