English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Aims:   The study aimed to compare and analyze the outcomes of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NPPV) in the treatment of patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) who had extubation after weaning from mechanical ventilation.Methods:   A total 120 patients with AHRF were enrolled into this study. These patients underwent tracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation. They were organized into two groups according to the score of Acute Physiologic Assessment and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II); group A: APACHE II score   0.05). Occurrence rate of re-intubation within 72 h of extubation was slightly, but not significantly, higher in NPPV-treated patients ( p &gt; 0.05).Conclusion:   There was no significant difference between HFNC and NPPV in preventing respiratory failure in patients with AHRF with an APACHE II score &lt;24 after extubation. However, HFNC was superior to NPPV with less incidence of abdominal distension. The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

therapeutic advances in respiratory disease

Comparison of outcomes of high-flow nasal cannula and noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation in patients with hypoxemia and various APACHE II scores after extubation