ClinicalTrials.gov
public full text
Public Domain
HFNC vs Nasal Cannula in Mild Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Exacerbation
For AECOPD patients, only 8% patients ventilated by noninvasive and invasive positive pressure ventilation. Nasal cannula is the most common pattern of oxygen therapy in mild AECOPD. As a low flow oxygen therapy, nasal cannula has many disadvantages.Therefore, we design a randomized controlled trial(RCT)to explore whether HFNC would be better than nasal cannula to prevent the aggravation of respiratory failure and endotracheal intubation in mild AECOPD.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Influence of HFNO on Spontaneous Breathing Support in Patients of Different ASA Risk During Moderate Multimodal Analgo-sedation for Pars Plana Vitrectomy#830490
- CPAP vs High-Flow Nasal Cannula for Treating Sleep Apnea in Children#889888
- High-Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygenation During Sedated Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease#1115064
- Correlation of ETCO2 to PaCO2 Measured by Sentri Nasal Cannula#1103966
- High Flow Nasal Oxygen Versus VNI in Acute Hypercapnic Cardiogenic Pulmonary Edema#979805
Record · ID 888498
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive