# The Comparative Effectiveness of High-Flow Nasal Cannula Therapy Versus Noninvasive Positive Pressure Ventilation in Patients With Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure

**Authors:** Muhammad Sarfraz, Asad Saleem, Muhammad Hamza Saeed, Maryam Atta, Mohammad Saleem Khan, Sohail K Raja, Rida Khan

PMC · DOI: 10.7759/cureus.87917 · Cureus · 2025-07-14

## TL;DR

This study compares two noninvasive treatments for breathing problems and finds one improves oxygen levels more effectively.

## Contribution

The study provides evidence that high-flow nasal cannula therapy may be more effective than NIPPV for oxygenation in acute respiratory failure.

## Key findings

- HFNC therapy significantly improved oxygen saturation compared to NIPPV.
- No significant differences were found in survival rates, ICU stay, or intubation needs between the two therapies.
- Multivariate and logistic regression analyses failed to identify significant predictors of survival.

## Abstract

This retrospective observational study assessed the comparative effectiveness of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy versus noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) in a cohort of 300 patients diagnosed with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF). The mean age of the participants was 53.92 years (SD = 22.08), with 55.3% males (n = 166) and a mean BMI of 27.07 kg/m² (SD = 4.85). Patients were nearly evenly distributed between the HFNC (n = 152) and NIPPV (n = 148) groups. Survival was observed in 51.7% (n = 155), with no statistically significant difference between groups. Oxygen saturation improvement was significantly greater in the HFNC group [median SpO₂ = 94%, interquartile range (IQR): 92-96] compared to the NIPPV group (median SpO₂ = 93%, IQR: 91-95; U = 9543.0, p = 0.018). Other metrics, including respiratory rate (HFNC median = 28, NIPPV median = 29; p = 0.207), ICU stay >7 days (28.7%, n = 86), and need for intubation (35.7%, n = 107), did not differ significantly. Multivariate regression showed poor model fit (adjusted R² = -0.017), and logistic regression failed to identify significant survival predictors (χ² = 15.425, df = 17, p = 0.565). These results support HFNC as a viable, potentially superior noninvasive option, particularly for enhancing oxygenation.

## Full-text entities

- **Diseases:** AHRF (MESH:D012131)
- **Chemicals:** Oxygen (MESH:D010100)
- **Species:** Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12335863/full.md

## Figures

5 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12335863/full.md

## References

25 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12335863/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12335863