Study Title: Efficiency and Safety of High Flow Nassal Cannula Versus Noninvasive Ventilation for Pulsary Arterial Hypertension Associated Acute Respiratory Failure: A Retrospective Cohort Study Stratified by Right Ventricular Dysfunction Severity Background: Patients with pulmonary hypertension (PH) typically have high morbidity and mortality when they develop acute respiratory failure (ARF) The best method of respiratory support considering the severity of right ventricular (RV) dysfunction is still uncertain.
Main objective: heart function parameters (e.g. TAPSE and RVSP) Secondary objectives: respiratory support success rate (defined as the avoidance of endotracheal introduction or death duration hospitalization), respiratory support duration, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, length of hospital stay, and in-hospital mortality.
Research Design: This is a single center, retrospective, propensity score matching cohort study.
The study will compare two groups: high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and non-invasive ventilation (NIV).
Significance: This study aims to address whether NIV or HFNC should be prioritized for the treatment of acute respiratory failure associated with pulmonary arterial hypertension in patients with severe right ventricular dysfunction who require high flow nasal cannula and non-invasive ventilation.
Innovation: A patient stratification method based on the severity of right ventricular dysfunction to evaluate the effectiveness of HFNC treatment and NIV in PH related ARF patients.
Expected outcome: HFNC treatment is equally effective as NIV in treating mild to moderate right ventricular dysfunction; NIV may be more beneficial for critically ill patients. Assist PH patients with ARF in choosing between HFNC treatment and NIV.
Conclusion: Our study provides new insights into the comparative performance of HFNC therapy and NIV in patients with PH combined with ARF.
