{"title":"Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and high-flow nasal therapy (HFNT) in palliative care: a critical narrative review.","authors":"Sebastiano Mercadante","doi":"10.1136/spcare-2026-006580","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dyspnoea is a prevalent, debilitating symptom in advanced life-limiting illnesses. While opioids and non-pharmacological measures remain foundational, refractory breathlessness presents a major palliative challenge.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To critically appraise the evidence regarding patient selection, comparative tolerability, adverse effects and ethical considerations of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and high-flow nasal therapy (HFNT) in palliative care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive narrative review of literature from PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library (from inception to June 2026) and major clinical guidelines was conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>NIV is best supported in hypercapnic respiratory failure (PaCO >45 mm Hg), showing benefits in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations, pulmonary oedema and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). In advanced cancer, NIV reduces dyspnoea primarily in hypercapnic patients but mask discomfort and communication barriers limit tolerability. Conversely, HFNT has emerged as a superiorly tolerated option in hypoxemic failure-particularly in end-stage interstitial lung disease (ILD) and advanced cancer-providing significant dyspnoea relief while preserving oral intake and verbal communication until the end of life. Time-limited trials (<1 hour for NIV; 2 hours for HFNT) help identify early responders. Ethical challenges include potential overtreatment and support withdrawal complexities.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Respiratory support selection should be guided by respiratory physiology (hypercapnic vs hypoxemic), explicit goals of care and tolerability. NIV remains optimal for hypercapnic failure, whereas HFNT offers superior comfort and preserves communication in hypoxaemic patients. Robust randomised trials are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":9136,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/spcare-2026-006580","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Dyspnoea is a prevalent, debilitating symptom in advanced life-limiting illnesses. While opioids and non-pharmacological measures remain foundational, refractory breathlessness presents a major palliative challenge.
Objectives: To critically appraise the evidence regarding patient selection, comparative tolerability, adverse effects and ethical considerations of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and high-flow nasal therapy (HFNT) in palliative care.
Methods: A comprehensive narrative review of literature from PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library (from inception to June 2026) and major clinical guidelines was conducted.
Results: NIV is best supported in hypercapnic respiratory failure (PaCO >45 mm Hg), showing benefits in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations, pulmonary oedema and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). In advanced cancer, NIV reduces dyspnoea primarily in hypercapnic patients but mask discomfort and communication barriers limit tolerability. Conversely, HFNT has emerged as a superiorly tolerated option in hypoxemic failure-particularly in end-stage interstitial lung disease (ILD) and advanced cancer-providing significant dyspnoea relief while preserving oral intake and verbal communication until the end of life. Time-limited trials (<1 hour for NIV; 2 hours for HFNT) help identify early responders. Ethical challenges include potential overtreatment and support withdrawal complexities.
Conclusions: Respiratory support selection should be guided by respiratory physiology (hypercapnic vs hypoxemic), explicit goals of care and tolerability. NIV remains optimal for hypercapnic failure, whereas HFNT offers superior comfort and preserves communication in hypoxaemic patients. Robust randomised trials are needed.
背景:呼吸困难是晚期限制生命疾病中一种普遍的衰弱症状。虽然阿片类药物和非药物措施仍然是基础,但难治性呼吸困难是姑息治疗的主要挑战。目的:批判性地评估姑息治疗中无创通气(NIV)和高流量鼻治疗(HFNT)的患者选择、相对耐受性、不良反应和伦理考虑方面的证据。方法:对PubMed、Embase和Cochrane图书馆自成立至2026年6月的文献及主要临床指南进行综合叙述性综述。结果:NIV在高碳酸血症性呼吸衰竭(PaCO bb0 45 mm Hg)中得到最好的支持,在慢性阻塞性肺疾病加重、肺水肿和肌萎缩侧索硬化症(ALS)中显示出益处。在晚期癌症中,NIV主要减轻高碳酸血症患者的呼吸困难,但掩盖了不适和沟通障碍,限制了耐受性。相反,HFNT已成为低氧血症衰竭患者(尤其是终末期间质性肺疾病(ILD)和晚期癌症患者)的一种耐受性较好的选择,可显著缓解呼吸困难,同时保持口服摄入和语言交流,直到生命结束。结论:呼吸支持的选择应以呼吸生理学(高碳酸血症vs低氧血症)、明确的护理目标和耐受性为指导。NIV仍然是高碳酸血症失败的最佳选择,而HFNT在低氧血症患者中提供更好的舒适性并保持沟通。需要可靠的随机试验。
期刊介绍:
Published quarterly in print and continuously online, BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care aims to connect many disciplines and specialties throughout the world by providing high quality, clinically relevant research, reviews, comment, information and news of international importance.
We hold an inclusive view of supportive and palliative care research and we are able to call on expertise to critique the whole range of methodologies within the subject, including those working in transitional research, clinical trials, epidemiology, behavioural sciences, ethics and health service research. Articles with relevance to clinical practice and clinical service development will be considered for publication.
In an international context, many different categories of clinician and healthcare workers do clinical work associated with palliative medicine, specialist or generalist palliative care, supportive care, psychosocial-oncology and end of life care. We wish to engage many specialties, not only those traditionally associated with supportive and palliative care. We hope to extend the readership to doctors, nurses, other healthcare workers and researchers in medical and surgical specialties, including but not limited to cardiology, gastroenterology, geriatrics, neurology, oncology, paediatrics, primary care, psychiatry, psychology, renal medicine, respiratory medicine.