Reviews on recent clinical trials · 2020
Indications for Non-Invasive Ventilation in Respiratory Failure.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Navarra Simone Maria, Congedo Maria Teresa, Pennisi Mariano Alberto
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) is increasingly being used to treat episodes of acute respiratory failure not only in critical care and respiratory wards, but also in emergency departments.
AIM: Aim of this review is to summarize the current indications for the management of NIV for respiratory failure.
METHODS: Current literature about the topic was reviewed and critically reported to describe the rationale and physiologic advantages of NIV in various situations of respiratory failure.
RESULTS: Early NIV use is commonly associated with the significant decrease in endotracheal intubation rate, the incidence of infective complications (especially ventilatory associated pneumonia), Intensive Care Units and the length of hospital stay and, in selected conditions, also in mortality rates. Severe acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (pH<7.35 and relative hypercarbia) and acute cardiogenic pulmonary oedema are the most common NIV indications; in these conditions NIV advantages are clearly documented. Not so evident are the NIV benefits in hypoxaemic respiratory failure occurring without prior chronic respiratory disease (De novo respiratory failure). One recent randomized control trial reported in hypoxaemic respiratory failure a survival benefit of high-flow nasal cannulae over standard oxygen therapy and bilevel NIV. Evidence suggests the advantages of NIV also in respiratory failure in immunocompromised patients or chest trauma patients. Use during a pandemic event has been assessed in several observational studies but remains controversial; there also is not sufficient evidence to support the use of NIV treatment in acute asthma exacerbation.
CONCLUSION: NIV eliminates morbidity related to the endotracheal tube (loss of airway defense mechanism with increased risk of pneumonia) and in selected conditions (COPD exacerbation, acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema, immunosuppressed patients with pulmonary infiltrates and hypoxia) is clearly associated with a better outcome in comparison to conventional invasive ventilation. However, NIV is associated with complications, especially minor complications related to interface. Major complications like aspiration pneumonia, barotrauma and hypotension are infrequent.
AIM: Aim of this review is to summarize the current indications for the management of NIV for respiratory failure.
METHODS: Current literature about the topic was reviewed and critically reported to describe the rationale and physiologic advantages of NIV in various situations of respiratory failure.
RESULTS: Early NIV use is commonly associated with the significant decrease in endotracheal intubation rate, the incidence of infective complications (especially ventilatory associated pneumonia), Intensive Care Units and the length of hospital stay and, in selected conditions, also in mortality rates. Severe acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (pH<7.35 and relative hypercarbia) and acute cardiogenic pulmonary oedema are the most common NIV indications; in these conditions NIV advantages are clearly documented. Not so evident are the NIV benefits in hypoxaemic respiratory failure occurring without prior chronic respiratory disease (De novo respiratory failure). One recent randomized control trial reported in hypoxaemic respiratory failure a survival benefit of high-flow nasal cannulae over standard oxygen therapy and bilevel NIV. Evidence suggests the advantages of NIV also in respiratory failure in immunocompromised patients or chest trauma patients. Use during a pandemic event has been assessed in several observational studies but remains controversial; there also is not sufficient evidence to support the use of NIV treatment in acute asthma exacerbation.
CONCLUSION: NIV eliminates morbidity related to the endotracheal tube (loss of airway defense mechanism with increased risk of pneumonia) and in selected conditions (COPD exacerbation, acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema, immunosuppressed patients with pulmonary infiltrates and hypoxia) is clearly associated with a better outcome in comparison to conventional invasive ventilation. However, NIV is associated with complications, especially minor complications related to interface. Major complications like aspiration pneumonia, barotrauma and hypotension are infrequent.