Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40486342›Full record

ReviewCureus2025

Comparative Effectiveness of High-Flow Nasal Cannula and Noninvasive Ventilation in Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: A Scoping Review.

Viktor Kunder, Johnathon Harris, Dyese Moody

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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 · 2026
    Article
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

3 authors.

Viktor KunderInternal Medicine, Brooke Army Medical Center, San Antonio, USA.
Johnathon HarrisInternal Medicine, Brooke Army Medical Center, San Antonio, USA.
Dyese MoodyInternal Medicine, Brooke Army Medical Center, San Antonio, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) is a leading cause of ICU admissions, and noninvasive respiratory support modalities such as high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) are frequently employed. However, the comparative effectiveness of these two interventions across different patient populations remains unclear. This scoping review aimed to synthesize current evidence comparing HFNC and NIV in the management of adult patients with AHRF, focusing on outcomes such as intubation rates, mortality, patient comfort, oxygenation, and complications. Studies were included if they: (1) were primary research articles, (2) involved human adults with AHRF, (3) directly compared HFNC with NIV, and (4) reported on clinical outcomes. Systematic reviews, case reports, editorials, and studies focused exclusively on immunocompromised or postoperative populations were excluded. A systematic search of PubMed, MEDLINE (via Ovid), and the Cochrane Library was conducted through February 2025. Three independent reviewers screened and selected studies using Rayyan. Data extraction was performed using a structured template capturing study design, sample size, population, intervention details, and relevant outcomes. Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria. HFNC and NIV demonstrated comparable effectiveness in reducing intubation rates across most patient populations. In COVID-19-associated AHRF, the two modalities yielded similar outcomes in terms of intubation and mortality. HFNC was consistently associated with greater patient comfort and fewer complications, particularly with respect to interface tolerance and skin breakdown. However, NIV remained more effective in clearing carbon dioxide, especially in patients with hypercapnic respiratory failure, such as those with COPD exacerbations. ORs were infrequently reported; however, one study reported an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.75 (95% CI: 0.58-0.98) favoring HFNC over oxygen masks for ICU mortality. HFNC may be preferable for patients who have difficulty tolerating masks or are at lower risk for hypercapnia, while NIV remains the standard of care in hypercapnic respiratory failure. Mortality outcomes were inconclusive. Future randomized controlled trials should target specific patient subgroups and examine long-term outcomes and hospital resource utilization to optimize noninvasive respiratory support strategies in AHRF.

Indexed as

acute hypoxemic respiratory failurecopd exacerbationcovid-19critical carehigh-flow nasal cannulaintubationmechanical ventilation avoidancenoninvasive ventilationoxygen therapyrespiratory support

Identifiers

PMID40486342
PMCPMC12145221

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.