ArticleInternational journal of emergency medicine2025
A retrospective study to predict failure of high-flow oxygen therapy for acute hypoxic respiratory failure.
Article in International journal of emergency medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prediction of high-flow nasal cannula failure in critically ill patients: a narrative review.Journal of intensive care · 2026Review
- Ward-Based High-Flow Nasal Cannula Led by the Medical Emergency Team: A Pragmatic Model for Resource Stewardship.Critical care explorations · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to analyze the characteristics of patients who fail high-flow nasal cannula(HFNC) therapy for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure(AHRF) and to identify predictors of treatment failure.
methodsThis single-center, retrospective, observational study analyzed clinical data from 388 patients with AHRF. Patients were divided into two groups: the HFNC success group (HFNC-S, n = 256) and the HFNC failure group (HFNC-F, n = 132). The primary endpoint was the need for escalation of respiratory support to tracheal intubation in the enrolled patients. The demographic data, laboratory tests, blood gas analysis data, CT severity scores, and disease severity scores were analysed to determine the difference between patients who were successful and those who failed HFNC treatment. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to assess potential predictors of failure of HFNC for patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure.
resultsThe mean age of patients enrolled was 67.97 ± 14.40 years. The HFNC-F group had significantly higher PSI(Pneumonia Severity Index) score, CURB(Confusion, Urea, Respiratory Rate, Blood Pressure, and Age)-65 score, CPIS(Clinical Pulmonary Infection Score) score, CT score and SOFA(Sequential Organ Failure Assessment) scores compared to the HFNC-S group. Within 12 h of the initiation of treatment, the HFNC-F group exhibited significantly lower oxygen saturation index (PaO2/FiO2) and significantly higher respiratory rate. Additionally, the HFNC-F group exhibited significantly higher levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), platelet count (PLT), D-dimer, interleukin-10 (IL-10), total bilirubin (TB) and creatinine (CB), but lower albumin levels. Multivariate analysis identified CT score, SOFA score, interleukin-1β (IL-1β), and albumin as independent predictors of HFNC failure.
conclusionHFNC is effective for treating AHRF. CT score, SOFA score, IL-1β, and albumin are independent predictors of HFNC failure.
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.