2015
DOI: 10.4187/respcare.04026
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Efficacy of High-Flow Nasal Cannula Therapy in Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: Decreased Use of Mechanical Ventilation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
33
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 54 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
33
0
Order By: Relevance
“…DOI: 10.4187/respcare.04577 earlier, and it has a possibility of decreasing the use of mechanical ventilation. 15 …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…DOI: 10.4187/respcare.04577 earlier, and it has a possibility of decreasing the use of mechanical ventilation. 15 …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The latter may be due to a lack of predefined discontinuation criteria, distraction and/or missed cues, inexperience with the device and its use, or a desire to avoid escalation due to patient or provider bias. The current studies by Nagata et al, 7 Gaunt et al, 8 Rittayamai et al, 9 and Vargas et al 10 failed to define such abandonment criteria, and in particular, Rittayamai et al 9 acknowledge several such limitations of their study. First, a median 1.5 h elapsed between recognition and implementation of HFNC or conventional oxygen therapy.…”
Section: Cautions and Limitations In The Use Of Hfncmentioning
confidence: 58%
“…However, the limited patient population, comparatively disparate mortality in the shock subgroups, and the non-protective ventilation strategy (average tidal volume [V T ] in excess of 9 mL/kg) in the NIV group preclude a definitive conclusion from these results. In this issue of RESPIRATORY CARE, 5 original research articles by Nagata et al, 7 Gaunt et al, 8 Rittayamai et al, 9 Vargas et al, 10 and Parke et al 11 explore aspects of HFNC ranging from the physiologic basis for its use to the comparative risks, benefits, and clinical efficacy of conventional oxygen therapy, NIV, and HFNC in the acute care setting. In the end, and in the context of conflicting end points, such as length of stay, ventilator-free days, and mortality, prudence suggests a skeptical interpretation of appropriate use for HFNC in patients experiencing acute hypoxemic, non-hypercapnic respiratory failure.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The use of HFNO was associated with lower mortality in hypoxemic respiratory failure 21 . Compared to conventional oxygen therapy, HFNO is associated with decreased risk of subsequent intubation (relative risk [RR] 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74‐0.99) 22 and need for ICU admission 23,24 …”
Section: Intermediate Therapiesmentioning
confidence: 99%