Respiratory failure & ventilation
Physiological Effects of High-Flow Nasal Oxygen Compared With Conventional Oxygen Therapy: A Randomized Trial in Postextubation Patients
- Inclusion stopped early (42 of 54 targeted) because of slow recruitment
Authors' conclusion
There was no difference between HFNO and COT on respiratory effort and ventilation distribution in the first 24 hours postextubation.
Study context
- Population
- Adults invasively ventilated ≥48 hours meeting weaning readiness criteria, 2 ICUs in The Netherlandsof 54 targeted
- Participants
- 42 participants
- Comparison
- High-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) vs conventional oxygen therapy (COT) for 24 hours postextubation
- HFNOn = 22
- COTn = 20reference
- Primary endpoint
- Change in ΔP ES from baseline
- Follow-up
- Up to 24 hours postextubation
Methodological detailstwo-centre, physiological, Protocol completed without crossover in 20 of 22 (91%) HFNO and 11 of 20 (55%) COT
- Two-centre
- Physiological
- Protocol completed without crossover in 20 of 22 (91%) HFNO and 11 of 20 (55%) COT
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
COT
1.5
interval 0.0–5.1 · cm H 2 O
HFNO
−1.3
interval −2.8–2.2 · cm H 2 O
P = 0.11
Secondary outcomes
| Outcome | HFNO | COT | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Change in sPTP ES /min · up to 24 hours postextubation | 0 (interval −47–43) cm H 2 O·s/min | 66 (interval −7–111) cm H 2 O·s/min | P = 0.04 |
| Correlation of baseline with postextubation ΔP ES and sPTP ES /min | |||
| ∆P ES r | −0.6 | — not stated in the abstract | |
| sPTP ES /min r | −0.6 | — not stated in the abstract |
— not stated in the abstract
Correlation of baseline with postextubation ΔP ES and sPTP ES /min
- Inverse correlation in HFNO (p < 0.01 each), not in COT (p > 0.05)
Electrical impedance tomography (EIT)-derived ventilation parameters
- No relevant differences
Original publication
Physiological Effects of High-Flow Nasal Oxygen Compared With Conventional Oxygen Therapy: A Randomized Trial in Postextubation Patients. Crit Care Med. Published 15 December 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →