ClinicalTrials.gov
public full text
Public Domain
High-flow Oxygen Therapy vs Non-invasive Ventilation: Comparison of Alveolar Recruitment in Acute Respiratory Failure
This physiological study showed an increase in regional ventilation with NIV but no difference in alveolar recruitment as compared to HFNC in patients with hypoxemic ARF. Although NIV provided better oxygenation than HFNC, the effect on lung volumes could explain the potentially deleterious effect of NIV in hypoxemic ARF, reinforcing the recently developed concept of patient self-inflicted lung injury.
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
- High Flow Nasal Oxygen Versus VNI in Acute Hypercapnic Cardiogenic Pulmonary Edema#979805
- HFNC vs Nasal Cannula in Mild Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Exacerbation#888498
- Dexmedetomidine Improved Oxygenation and Reduced Shunt in One-Lung Ventilation at High-Risk Pediatric Thoracic Surgery#1162005
- Hyperbaric Oxygen as an Adjuvant Treatment for Patients With Covid-19 Severe Hypoxemia#841406
Record · ID 909556
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