Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32714476›Full record

Observational studyCanadian respiratory journal2020

High-Flow Nasal Cannula versus Noninvasive Positive Pressure Ventilation in Patients with Heart Failure after Extubation: An Observational Cohort Study.

Che-Jung Chang, Ling-Ling Chiang, Kuan-Yuan Chen, Po-Hao Feng, Chien-Ling Su, Han-Shui Hsu

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Canadian respiratory journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07059689 (High Flow Nasal Cannula vs. Non-Invasive Ventilation in Post-Extubation Pediatric Cardiac Surgery Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT07059689 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

High Flow Nasal Cannula vs. Non-Invasive Ventilation in Post-Extubation Pediatric Cardiac Surgery Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorIndonesia UniversityRan2025 to 2025Enrolled114ConditionsHeart Defects, Congenital, Intensive Care Units, Pediatric, Respiration, Artificial, ExtubationArmsHigh Flow Nasal Cannula (HFNC), Non-Invasive Ventilation (NIV)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Che-Jung ChangInstitute of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-9906-0163
Ling-Ling ChiangDivision of Pulmonary Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-6482-6907
Kuan-Yuan ChenDivision of Pulmonary Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Po-Hao FengDivision of Pulmonary Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Chien-Ling SuDivision of Pulmonary Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-4404-3526
Han-Shui HsuInstitute of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-4584-1626
Taipei Medical University-Shuang Ho Hospital · TWNational Yang Ming Chiao Tung University · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV) has been widely applied in patients with high-risk extubation failure, including heart failure. High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has been demonstrated to benefit patients with heart failure by reducing cardiac preload. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of HFNC to NPPV for preventing extubation failure in patients with heart failure. This 3-year retrospective and single-center cohort study included patients with heart failure with left ventricular ejection fraction <50% who received prophylactic HFNC or NPPV after scheduled extubation from January 2015 to January 2018 from a medical center with four adult intensive care units. Demographics, comorbidities, diagnosis, and weaning status were collected. The primary outcome was treatment failure within 72 hours after extubation, which was defined as escalation to NPPV or reintubation in the HFNC group and was defined as requiring reintubation in the NPPV group. Secondary outcomes were reintubation within 72 hours, reintubation, duration of stay, and mortality during the intensive care unit and hospital stay. Of the 104 patients analyzed, characteristics of 58 patients in the HFNC group and 46 patients in the NPPV group were compared. The treatment failure within 72 hours in the two groups was not significantly different (25.9% vs 13%,

Indexed as

Airway ExtubationHeart FailureNoninvasive VentilationPositive-Pressure RespirationRespiratory InsufficiencyAgedCannulaFemaleHumansMaleOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CareRetreatmentStroke VolumeTaiwanTreatment FailureVentricular Function, Left

Identifiers

PMID32714476
PMCPMC7354657
OpenAlexW3038171620

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.