Clinical efficacy of high-flow nasal humidified oxygen therapy in patients with hypoxemia

Autor: Hongchang Gong, Zhigang Zhang, Weigang Yue, Bin Li, Lin Deng, Qiliang Hou, Ting Lei, Xiangjun Wu, Maozhou Gan
Rok vydání: 2019
Předmět:
Male
Critical Care and Emergency Medicine
Pulmonology
Physiology
medicine.medical_treatment
Peptide Hormones
Biochemistry
Brain Natriuretic Peptide
Hypoxemia
0302 clinical medicine
Heart Rate
Medicine and Health Sciences
Medicine
Intubation
Venturi mask
Hypoxia
Oxygen saturation (medicine)
Flow Rate
Multidisciplinary
Physics
Respiration
Classical Mechanics
Middle Aged
Chemistry
Anesthesia
Physical Sciences
Female
medicine.symptom
Research Article
Chemical Elements
Science
Partial Pressure
Cardiology
Surgical and Invasive Medical Procedures
Fluid Mechanics
Nose
Continuum Mechanics
03 medical and health sciences
Respiratory Rate
Respiratory Failure
Natriuretic Peptide
Intensive care
Pressure
Humans
Mechanical ventilation
business.industry
Tracheal intubation
Oxygen Inhalation Therapy
Biology and Life Sciences
030208 emergency & critical care medicine
Humidity
Fluid Dynamics
Hormones
Oxygen
030228 respiratory system
Respiratory failure
business
Physiological Processes
Zdroj: PLoS ONE
PLoS ONE, Vol 14, Iss 6, p e0216957 (2019)
ISSN: 1932-6203
Popis: To evaluate the effectiveness of high-flow nasal humidified oxygen (HFNHO) therapy in patients with mild hypoxemia after extubation. This study included 316 patients with mild hypoxemia after extubation from May 2016 to May 2018 from two intensive care units in China. Compare the effects of the Venturi Mask and High-Flow Nasal Humidified Oxygen (HFNHO) therapy on Heart Rate (HR), Respiratory Rate (RR), Oxygen Saturation (SpO2), Oxygen Partial Pressure (PO2), Partial Pressure Of Carbon Dioxide (PCO2), Oxygenation Index (PO2/FiO2) after extubation, the use of noninvasive mechanical ventilation and tracheal intubation after treatment failure were observed and recorded. Patients have both lower HR and RR than those who received mask treatment (75.4±18.5 vs. 83.0±20.4, p = 0.0004; 18±6.5 vs. 23.6±10.3, p
Databáze: OpenAIRE
Externí odkaz:
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje