Last updated on July 2019

Efficacy of HFNC Versus NIV for Prevent Reintubation in Sepsis Patients


Brief description of study

Post extubation respiratory failure occur in 30% of extubated patients. More than 50% of them required reintubation. Noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIV) had been reported as an effective tool to prevent post extubation respiratory failure. Recently, high flow oxygen nasal cannula (HFNC) had been successfully used to prevent post extubation respiratory failure and prevent reintubation in comparable with NIV among post cardiothoracic surgery and high risk for reintubated patients. There was no information about HFNC versus NIV in prevention of reintubation among severe sepsis or septic shock patients.

Detailed Study Description

Post extubation respiratory failure occur in 30% of extubated patients. More than 50% of them required reintubation. Noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIV) had been reported as an effective tool to prevent post extubation respiratory failure. Recently, high flow oxygen nasal cannula (HFNC) had been successfully used to prevent post extubation respiratory failure and prevent reintubation. The results from recent randomized controlled trials, comparing HFNC with NIV for prevent post extubation respiratory failure among post cardiac surgery and high risk patients, showed no significant different in the treatment outcome.comparable with NIV among post cardiothoracic surgery and high risk for reintubated patients.

About 40-85% of severe sepsis/septic shock patients developed acute respiratory failure, required endotracheal intubation. According to the nature of patients population, usually eldery, multiple co-morbid condition and high APACHE II score, sepsis patients were considerred as high risk for reintubation, after extubated. There was no information about HFNC versus NIV in prevention of reintubation among severe sepsis or septic shock patients.

Clinical Study Identifier: NCT03246893

Find a site near you

Start Over