Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 1990 Apr;211(4):486-91.
doi: 10.1097/00000658-199004000-00017.

Comparison of conventional mechanical ventilation and high-frequency ventilation. A prospective, randomized trial in patients with respiratory failure

J M Hurst  1 , R D Branson, K Davis Jr, R R Barrette, K S Adams
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Comparison of conventional mechanical ventilation and high-frequency ventilation. A prospective, randomized trial in patients with respiratory failure

J M Hurst et al. Ann Surg. 1990 Apr.

Abstract

Acute respiratory failure (ARF) following trauma or sepsis has a mortality rate of 50% to 85%. The mainstays of treatment are mechanical ventilation and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP). In the past decade, many reports have claimed superiority of high frequency ventilation (HFV) in the treatment of ARF. We structured a prospective randomized trial of HFV versus conventional mechanical ventilation (CMV) in the treatment of acute respiratory failure. All patients admitted to the Surgical Intensive Care Unit (SICU) were eligible for the study. On admission patients identified for being at risk of developing acute respiratory failure were randomized to receive either HFV or CMV. Patients were treated to the same therapeutic endpoint (pH greater than 7.35, PaCO2 35 to 45 torr, PaO2/FIO2 greater than 225). Daily ventilatory support, fluid and drug requirements, and cardiopulmonary variables were recorded. One hundred thirteen patients were entered into the study. Of these, 100 completed the study (HFV n = 52, CMV n = 48) and 60 developed acute respiratory failure (HFV n = 32, CMV n = 28). Patients on HFV reached the therapeutic endpoint at a lower level of continuous positive airway pressure and mean airway pressure; however there were no differences in mortality, SICU days, hospital days, incidence of barotrauma, number of blood gases, or cardiovascular interventions. This report suggests that HFV offers no concrete advantages over CMV when applied in a prospective fashion for the treatment of acute respiratory failure.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Ann Surg. 1973 Sep;178(3):265-72 - PubMed
    1. N Engl J Med. 1975 Feb 6;292(6):284-9 - PubMed
    1. Crit Care Med. 1978 Sep-Oct;6(5):323-6 - PubMed
    1. Am J Med. 1979 Feb;66(2):196-200 - PubMed
    1. Clin Chest Med. 1982 Jan;3(1):69-88 - PubMed