Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 4 Comparisons between patients avoid intubation and received invasive ventilation

From: Efficacy and safety of early prone positioning combined with HFNC or NIV in moderate to severe ARDS: a multi-center prospective cohort study

 Success, n = 11Failure, n = 9P value
Male (n, %)8 (73%)5 (56%)0.435
Age47 ± 954 ± 110.616
Diagnosis
 Influenza (n, %)5 (45%)4 (44%)0.965
 Other viral pneumonia (n, %)1 (9%)1 (11%)0.884
 Pneumonia without pathogen (n, %)5 (45%)2 (22%)0.104
 Legionella pneumonia (n, %)0 (0%)1 (11%)0.374
 Pneumocystis pneumonia (n, %)0 (0%)1 (11%)0.269
PaO2/FiO2 before prone position125 ± 41119 ± 190.043*
SpO2 (%) before prone position95 ± 193 ± 30.006*
Moderate ARDS (n, %)7 (64%)3 (33%)0.174
Severe ARDS (n, %)4 (36%)6 (67%)0.174
Need for ECMO support (n, %)0 (0%)3 (33%)0.043*
NIV combined with prone positioning (n, %)5 (45%)5 (56%)0.653
HFNC combined with prone positioning (n, %)8 (73%)4 (44%)0.409
Mortality (n, %)0 (0%)1 (11%)1.000
  1. ARDS acute respiratory distress syndrome, ECMO extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, NIV non-invasive ventilation, HFNC high-flow nasal cannula