Comparing the outcome of using high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy versus noninvasive ventilation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure

Abstract

BackgroundNoninvasive ventilation (NIV) is frequently employed as a treatment option for acute hypercapnic respiratory failure (AHRF) resulting from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Limited research has substantiated the claims made in recent studies regarding the feasibility of employing high flow nasal cannula (HFNC).AimOur study assessed the outcome of using HFNC versus NIV for COPD patients with AHRF.Patients and methodsEighty COPD patients with AHRF were confined to the respiratory intensive care unit (RICU) at Ain-Shams University Hospitals from December 2021 to 2023 and subdivided into two groups (40/group), where the first group was placed on NIV while the second group was placed on HFNC. Data during their hospital stay as demographic data, vital data, arterial blood gases, device duration, treatment failure, and mortality were recorded.ResultsThe majority were males with mean age 63.75 ± 9.05 years along with treatment failure and complications 25%, 12.5.% in NIV versus 45%, and zero% in HFNC, respectively, with longer hospital stay in NIV 10–15 days to 7–10 days in HFNC, and with no difference in mortality rate in both groups.ConclusionBoth modalities NIV and HFNC were effective for treating COPD with AHRF. However, NIV group was significantly superior than HFNC along with apparently faster improvement in ventilatory and respiratory status especially in high CO2 level while less complications and duration of hospital stay in HFNC with no difference in mortality in both groups.