TO COMPARE THE EFFICACY OF HFNC VS NIV IN ACUTE EXACERBATION OF COPD

COMPARATIVE EFFICACY OF HIGH FLOW NASAL CANNULA VERSUS NON-INVASIVE VENTILATION IN PATIENTS WITH ACUTE EXACERBATION OF CHRONIC OBSTRUCTIVE PULMONARY DISEASE: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL - NIL

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Phase 3

Study type

Interventional

Source

CTRI

Registry ID

CTRI/2025/03/081783

Enrollment

Registered

2025-03-06

Start date

Unknown

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2025-04-07

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Health Condition 1: J441- Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with (acute) exacerbation

Interventions

Intervention1: HEATED HUMIDIFIED HIGH FLOW NASAL CANNULA: HHHFNC WILL BE STARTED FOR PATIENTS OF AECOPD WHO WILL BE RANDOMIZED TO INTERVENTION ARM AFTER RECEIVING STANDARD MEDICAL TREATMENT AND NOT BE

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: PATIENTS WITH AGE MORE THAN OR EQUAL TO 18 YEARS WITH AECOPD

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Patients who have already received HFNC or NIV prior to enrollment in study Patients who are on long term domiciliary NIV support Patients who are in need of vasopressor support Patients with acute coronary syndrome or life-threatening arrhythmias Unconscious or uncooperative patients Patients who are in cardiorespiratory arrest and those who require mechanical ventilation Patients who suffered recent trauma to neck or face Pregnant females Patients who are on treatment with palliative intent Patients having active hemoptysis or active upper gastrointestinal bleeding Patients having pneumothorax, neuromuscular weakness

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
To compare the rate of change in values of arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (Pco2) and pH from baseline arterial blood gas values in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease treated with high flow nasal cannula versus non-invasive ventilation at 2 hours from enrollment in studyTimepoint: At 2 hours	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
To compare the rate of change in values of arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (Pco2) & pH from baseline arterial blood gas values in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease treated with high flow nasal cannula versus non-invasive ventilation at 6 hours from start of treatment To compare treatment failure rates between HFNC & NIV group To compare the rate of need for treatment switch between HFNC & NIV group To compare the rate of invasive mechanical ventilation needed in HFNC & NIV group To compare emergency department & hospital length of stay in HFNC & NIV group To compare in hospital mortality & mortality within 30 days of enrollment in study between HFNC & NIV groupTimepoint: At 6 hours from enrollment in study At 30 days from enrollment in study	—

Measure

Time frame

To compare the rate of change in values of arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (Pco2) & pH from baseline arterial blood gas values in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease treated with high flow nasal cannula versus non-invasive ventilation at 6 hours from start of treatment To compare treatment failure rates between HFNC & NIV group To compare the rate of need for treatment switch between HFNC & NIV group To compare the rate of invasive mechanical ventilation needed in HFNC & NIV group To compare emergency department & hospital length of stay in HFNC & NIV group To compare in hospital mortality & mortality within 30 days of enrollment in study between HFNC & NIV groupTimepoint: At 6 hours from enrollment in study At 30 days from enrollment in study

—

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactDR MEERA EKKA

AIIMS NEW DELHI

drmeera_2004@yahoo.co.in9811298656

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CTRI (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026