Trial reportJAMA2025
High-Flow Nasal Oxygen vs Noninvasive Ventilation in Patients With Acute Respiratory Failure: The RENOVATE Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JAMA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 51 papers, 7 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.
RandomizEd Adaptive Trial of High-Flow Nasal Oxygen Cannula Compared to Non-Invasive Ventilation for AcuTE Respiratory Failure
High-flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen Therapy Versus Conventional Oxygen Therapy in Patients With High-altitude Pulmonary Edema: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Study
Who cites it
51 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Risk assessment and prevention of postoperative and postprocedural respiratory failure: recommendations from an international expert panel.British journal of anaesthesia · 2026Guideline
- High-Flow Nasal Cannula Versus Noninvasive Ventilation for Prevention of Reintubation in High-Risk Critically Ill Patients (HIGH-FLOW OXY): An Informative Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Critical care explorations · 2026Pooled it
- High-Flow Nasal Cannula in Hypercapnic Respiratory Failure: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.The clinical respiratory journal · 2026Pooled it
- High-Flow Nasal Cannula Versus Noninvasive Ventilation in the Treatment of Hypercapnic Respiratory Failure: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of evidence-based medicine · 2026Pooled it
- High-flow nasal oxygen in perioperative and critical care: a bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- High-flow nasal cannula versus noninvasive ventilation in acute heart failure-related respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Physiological effects of noninvasive respiratory support strategies in adults with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Pooled it
- High-flow nasal cannula oxygenation in sedated endoscopy for high-risk obstructive sleep apnea patients: study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial.Annals of medicine · 2026Trial
- The Effect of Heated, Humidified High-Flow Air in COPD Patients With Chronic Bronchitis.Pulmonary medicine · 2025Trial
- Respiratory Support With Nasal High Flow Reduces Opioid Requirements During Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography.DEN open · 2027Article
- Impact of an ROX index-guided intubation strategy on mortality in patients receiving high-flow nasal cannula: a target trial emulation.Journal of intensive care · 2026Article
- Author Response: High Flow Nasal Cannula Over Non-invasive Ventilation in Preventing Reintubation: Signal Bias or Both?Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2026Article
- ERS Congress 2025: highlights from the Respiratory Intensive Care Assembly.ERJ open research · 2026Article
- Should early non-invasive ventilation be used in non-critical care wards for acute respiratory failure?Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Non-Invasive Respiratory Support in "De Novo" Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: Which Technique Is Best?Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Post-COVID Respiratory Sequelae in COPD: Mucus Plugging, Infectious Complications, and Risk-Stratified Follow-Up.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Prehospital treatment modalities for acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a scoping review.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Article
- High flow nasal cannula in the emergency department's resuscitation room: a prospective monocenter descriptive study.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Observational
- High-flow nasal oxygen versus noninvasive ventilation in acute respiratory failure: reflections on the RENOVATE trial.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Role of High flow nasal cannula in managing Type I respiratory failure in patients with neuromuscular disorders.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
55 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: High-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) are commonly used respiratory support therapies for patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF). Objective: To assess whether HFNO is noninferior to NIV on the rates of endotracheal intubation or death at 7 days in 5 patient groups with ARF. Design, Setting, and Participants: This noninferiority, randomized clinical trial enrolled hospitalized adults (aged ≥18 years; classified as 5 patient groups with ARF: nonimmunocompromised with hypoxemia, immunocompromised with hypoxemia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD] exacerbation with respiratory acidosis, acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema [ACPE], or hypoxemic COVID-19, which was added as a separate group on June 26, 2023) at 33 hospitals in Brazil between November 2019 and November 2023 (final follow-up: April 26, 2024). Interventions: High-flow nasal oxygen (n = 883) or NIV (n = 883). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was endotracheal intubation or death within 7 days assessed using a bayesian hierarchical model with dynamic borrowing across patient groups. Noninferiority was defined by a posterior probability of 0.992 or greater for an odds ratio (OR) less than 1.55. Results: Among 1800 patients, 1766 completed the study (mean age, 64 [SD, 17] years; 707 [40%] were women). The primary outcome of endotracheal intubation or death at 7 days occurred in 39% (344/883) in the HFNO group vs 38% (336/883) in the NIV group. In the immunocompromised with hypoxemia patient group, the primary outcome occurred in 57.1% (16/28) in the HFNO group vs 36.4% (8/22) in the NIV group; enrollment was stopped for futility (final OR, 1.07; 95% credible interval [CrI], 0.81-1.39; noninferiority posterior probability [NPP], 0.989). In the nonimmunocompromised with hypoxemia group, the primary outcome occurred in 32.5% (81/249) in the HFNO group vs 33.1% (78/236) in the NIV group (OR, 1.02 [95% CrI, 0.81-1.26]; NPP, 0.999). In the ACPE group, the primary outcome occurred in 10.3% (14/136) in the HFNO group vs 21.3% (29/136) in the NIV group (OR, 0.97 [95% CrI, 0.73-1.23]; NPP, 0.997). In the hypoxemic COVID-19 group, the primary outcome occurred in 51.3% (223/435) in the HFNO group vs 47.0% (210/447) in the NIV group (OR, 1.13 [95% CrI, 0.94-1.38]; NPP, 0.997). In the COPD exacerbation with respiratory acidosis group, the primary outcome occurred in 28.6% (10/35) in the HFNO group vs 26.2% (11/42) in the NIV group (OR, 1.05 [95% CrI, 0.79-1.36]; NPP, 0.992). However, a post hoc analysis without dynamic borrowing across the 5 ARF patient groups revealed some qualitatively different results in patients with COPD, immunocompromised patients, and patients with ACPE. The incidence of serious adverse events was similar (9.4% of patients in HFNO group vs 9.9% in NIV group). Conclusions and Relevance: Compared with NIV, HFNO met prespecified criteria for noninferiority for the primary outcome of endotracheal intubation or death within 7 days in 4 of the 5 patient groups with ARF. However, the small sample sizes in some patient groups and the sensitivity of the findings to the choice of analysis model suggests the need for further study in patients with COPD, immunocompromised patients, and patients with ACPE. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03643939.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.