Scholarlink

Background <p>Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) and high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) are widely used respiratory support strategies, but their comparative effectiveness in acute pancreatitis remains unclear. Therefore, we analyzed clinical outcomes associated with these interventions using the National Inpatient Sample database (2016–2022).</p> Methods <p>This retrospective study compared clinical outcomes between patients treated with NIV and those treated with HFNC, focusing on mortality, intubation rates, complications, length of stay (LOS), and healthcare costs. We conducted univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyzes, adjusting for patient demographics, hospital characteristics, and comorbidities.</p> Results <p>HFNC treatment was associated with higher mortality (25.7% vs. 15.9%), intubation rates (39.1% vs. 23.6%), and pulmonary complications (pneumonia: 35.2% vs. 23.9%; pulmonary embolism: 6.6% vs. 2.8%) compared to NIV. patients receiving HFNC had longer hospital stays (20.38 vs. 13.62&#xa0;days) and incurred higher healthcare costs ($302,387.31 vs. $198,870.53) (all <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001).</p> Conclusion <p>In this retrospective analysis, initial management with NIV was associated with better clinical outcomes and reduced healthcare resource utilization compared to HFNC in patients with acute pancreatitis. These findings warrant validation in prospective studies.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Comparison of clinical outcomes between non-invasive ventilation and high-flow nasal cannula use in patients with acute pancreatitis

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年1月17日

查看全文
  • Li Tang,
  • Xiaoyin Li,
  • Bei Zhang,
  • Jieshan Hu,
  • Hao Xie,
  • Nanfeng Huang,
  • Minzhi Di

摘要

Background

Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) and high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) are widely used respiratory support strategies, but their comparative effectiveness in acute pancreatitis remains unclear. Therefore, we analyzed clinical outcomes associated with these interventions using the National Inpatient Sample database (2016–2022).

Methods

This retrospective study compared clinical outcomes between patients treated with NIV and those treated with HFNC, focusing on mortality, intubation rates, complications, length of stay (LOS), and healthcare costs. We conducted univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyzes, adjusting for patient demographics, hospital characteristics, and comorbidities.

Results

HFNC treatment was associated with higher mortality (25.7% vs. 15.9%), intubation rates (39.1% vs. 23.6%), and pulmonary complications (pneumonia: 35.2% vs. 23.9%; pulmonary embolism: 6.6% vs. 2.8%) compared to NIV. patients receiving HFNC had longer hospital stays (20.38 vs. 13.62 days) and incurred higher healthcare costs ($302,387.31 vs. $198,870.53) (all P < 0.001).

Conclusion

In this retrospective analysis, initial management with NIV was associated with better clinical outcomes and reduced healthcare resource utilization compared to HFNC in patients with acute pancreatitis. These findings warrant validation in prospective studies.