Trial reportTurkish journal of medical sciences2021
The use of high-flow nasal oxygen vs. standard oxygen therapy in hematological malignancy patients with acute respiratory failure in hematology wards
Trial report in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
- 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
- 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
- Efficacy of nasal high-flow therapy versus standard oxygen therapy in hypoxemic respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTS.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
- Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock 2026.Intensive care medicine · 2026Article
- Non-Invasive Respiratory Support in "De Novo" Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: Which Technique Is Best?Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- High-flow nasal therapy vs conventional oxygen therapy in mild COVID-19 hypoxaemia: a Bayesian reanalysis of the COVID-HIGH Trial.Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care · 2026Article
- Review
- Impact of the Early Use of High-flow Nasal Cannula in Patients with Post-traumatic Lung Contusion: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2025Article
- Novel insights and clinical perception of the patients with acute leukemia transferred to ICU: a multi-center retrospective study spanning 10 years.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- ESICM guidelines on acute respiratory distress syndrome: definition, phenotyping and respiratory support strategies.Intensive care medicine · 2023Article
- Comparison of the efficacy and comfort of high-flow nasal cannula with different initial flow settings in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Journal of intensive care · 2023Article
- Respiratory support strategy in adults with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.JA clinical reports · 2022Article
- High-flow nasal oxygen in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: A narrative review of the evidence before and after the COVID-19 pandemic.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Review
- Effectiveness and Harms of High-Flow Nasal Oxygen for Acute Respiratory Failure: An Evidence Report for a Clinical Guideline From the American College of Physicians.Annals of internal medicine · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/aim: High flow nasal cannula (HFNC) was mostly used in intensive care units (ICUs) with few studies in other departments. We hypothesized that HFNC applied at wards is beneficial for acute respiratory failure in hematological malignancy patients. Materials and methods: The study is a single center, randomized controlled study. Inclusion criteria were hypoxemic respiratory failure and hematological malignancy. Patients were randomized to either venturi mask/nasal cannula oxygen treatment or HFNC. Results: One hundred patients were included in the study. Median age was 58.5 (18–86) years and APACHE II score was 17 (5–29). HFNC group was 51 patients and the oxygen treatment group 49 patients. P/F ratios were similar between the groups throughout the study period. Endotracheal intubation was required in 10 (20.0%) patients in oxygen group and 17 (33.0%) patients in HFNC group (p = 0.14). A total of 17 (35.0%) patients in oxygen group and 17 (33.0%) patients in HFNC group received noninvasive mechanical ventilation (p = 0.97). Median VAS comfort scores at the 2nd and 24th hours were not different between groups. The 28-day mortality rate was 36.7% (18 deaths) in the standard group and 45.0% (23 deaths) in the HFNC group (p = 0.39). Conclusion: HFNC applied in wards is not superior to standard oxygen treatment for acute respiratory failure in hematological malignancy patients.
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.