Trial reportJAMA2018
Effect of High-Flow Nasal Oxygen vs Standard Oxygen on 28-Day Mortality in Immunocompromised Patients With Acute Respiratory Failure: The HIGH Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JAMA, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02739451 (A Randomised Controlled Trial of High-Flow Nasal Oxygen Versus Standard Oxygen Therapy in Critically Ill Immunocompromised Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 149 papers, 15 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
A Randomised Controlled Trial of High-Flow Nasal Oxygen Versus Standard Oxygen Therapy in Critically Ill Immunocompromised Patients
Who cites it
149 citing papers in PubMed, 15 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 309 citations in OpenAlex.
- Respiratory Support in the Emergency Department: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Worldviews on evidence-based nursing · 2026Pooled it
- High-flow nasal oxygen for the relief of persistent dyspnea in adult patients with cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Palliative medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Eligibility Criteria of Randomized Clinical Trials in Critical Care Medicine.JAMA network open · 2025Pooled it
- High-flow nasal oxygen therapy compared with conventional oxygen therapy in hospitalised patients with respiratory illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open respiratory research · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Comparison of High-Flow Nasal Cannula with Conventional Oxygen Therapy in Patients with Hypercapnic Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2023Pooled it
- Efficacy of non-invasive and invasive respiratory management strategies in adult patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Critical care (London, England) · 2021Pooled it
- Non-invasive oxygenation strategies for respiratory failure with COVID-19: A concise narrative review of literature in pre and mid-COVID-19 era.Anaesthesia, critical care & pain medicine · 2021Pooled it
- High-flow nasal cannulae for respiratory support in adult intensive care patients.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- The role for high flow nasal cannula as a respiratory support strategy in adults: a clinical practice guideline.Intensive care medicine · 2020Guideline
- High-flow nasal cannula for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure in patients with COVID-19: systematic reviews of effectiveness and its risks of aerosolization, dispersion, and infection transmission.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2020Pooled it
- Pooled it
- The Impact of High-Flow Nasal Cannula on the Outcome of Immunocompromised Patients with Acute Respiratory Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2019Pooled it
- High flow nasal cannula compared with conventional oxygen therapy for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Intensive care medicine · 2019Pooled it
- High-flow nasal cannulae for respiratory support in adult intensive care patients.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Trial
- Early weaning from invasive mechanical ventilation via high-flow nasal oxygen versus conventional weaning in patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure: a prospective randomized controlled study.Critical care science · 2025Trial
- High-flow nasal cannula oxygen reduced hypoxemia in patients undergoing gastroscopy under general anesthesia at ultra-high altitude: a randomized controlled trial.BMC anesthesiology · 2024Trial
- Dyspnea is severe and associated with a higher intubation rate in de novo acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Trial
- The short-term efficacy of high flow nasal oxygen therapy on cardiovascular surgical patients: a randomized crossover trial.BMC anesthesiology · 2022Trial
89 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
34 authors at 20 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: High-flow nasal oxygen therapy is increasingly used for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF). Objective: To determine whether high-flow oxygen therapy decreases mortality among immunocompromised patients with AHRF compared with standard oxygen therapy. Design, Setting, and Participants: The HIGH randomized clinical trial enrolled 776 adult immunocompromised patients with AHRF (Pao2 <60 mm Hg or Spo2 <90% on room air, or tachypnea >30/min or labored breathing or respiratory distress, and need for oxygen ≥6 L/min) at 32 intensive care units (ICUs) in France between May 19, 2016, and December 31, 2017. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1 to continuous high-flow oxygen therapy (n = 388) or to standard oxygen therapy (n = 388). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was day-28 mortality. Secondary outcomes included intubation and mechanical ventilation by day 28, Pao2:Fio2 ratio over the 3 days after intubation, respiratory rate, ICU and hospital lengths of stay, ICU-acquired infections, and patient comfort and dyspnea. Results: Of 778 randomized patients (median age, 64 [IQR, 54-71] years; 259 [33.3%] women), 776 (99.7%) completed the trial. At randomization, median respiratory rate was 33/min (IQR, 28-39) vs 32 (IQR, 27-38) and Pao2:Fio2 was 136 (IQR, 96-187) vs 128 (IQR, 92-164) in the intervention and control groups, respectively. Median SOFA score was 6 (IQR, 4-8) in both groups. Mortality on day 28 was not significantly different between groups (35.6% vs 36.1%; difference, -0.5% [95% CI, -7.3% to +6.3%]; hazard ratio, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.24]; P = .94). Intubation rate was not significantly different between groups (38.7% vs 43.8%; difference, -5.1% [95% CI, -12.3% to +2.0%]). Compared with controls, patients randomized to high-flow oxygen therapy had a higher Pao2:Fio2 (150 vs 119; difference, 19.5 [95% CI, 4.4 to 34.6]) and lower respiratory rate after 6 hours (25/min vs 26/min; difference, -1.8/min [95% CI, -3.2 to -0.2]). No significant difference was observed in ICU length of stay (8 vs 6 days; difference, 0.6 [95% CI, -1.0 to +2.2]), ICU-acquired infections (10.0% vs 10.6%; difference, -0.6% [95% CI, -4.6 to +4.1]), hospital length of stay (24 vs 27 days; difference, -2 days [95% CI, -7.3 to +3.3]), or patient comfort and dyspnea scores. Conclusions and Relevance: Among critically ill immunocompromised patients with acute respiratory failure, high-flow oxygen therapy did not significantly decrease day-28 mortality compared with standard oxygen therapy. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02739451.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.