Journal of thoracic disease · 2020
Non-invasive ventilation for acute respiratory failure: pressure support ventilation vs. pressure-controlled ventilation.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Nam Hyunseung, Cho Jae Hwa, Park Tai Sun, Kim Sei Won, Kang Hyung Koo, Shin Yoon Mi, Hwang Jae Joon, Lee Kwangha, Ha Jick Hwan, Lee Young Seok, Chang Youjin, Park Sunghoon, Korean NIV Study Group
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The best ventilator mode for patients receiving non-invasive ventilation (NIV) has not been clarified. This study compared the effectiveness of two pressure-targeted modes, i.e., pressure support ventilation (PSV) and pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV), in patients receiving NIV.
METHODS: This was a prospective multicentre observational study of NIV use for acute respiratory failure (ARF) in adult patients. We compared the two pressure-targeted modes in terms of NIV success and complication rates.
RESULTS: Among 176 patients receiving NIV, 88 patients were included in the study (PCV mode, n=29; PSV mode, n=59). The study population had a median age of 73.0 years and median body mass index of 20.8 kg/m2. The applied inspiratory positive airway pressure (IPAP) was higher in patients with PCV than in those with PSV [18.0 cmH2O (15.0-20.5 cmH2O) vs. 15.0 cmH2O (12.0-17.0 cmH2O), respectively, P=0.001]. More patients with PCV received sedatives and experienced dry mouth than those with PSV; however, the incidences of large leaks were low in both groups (n=5 vs. n=2, respectively). With regard to NIV outcomes, 24 (27.2%) patients experienced NIV failure and 13 (14.8%) died in hospital. PSV mode was a significant factor for NIV success [odds ratio (OR), 2.303; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.216 to 4.360] in multivariate analyses and this association remained significant in a 1:1 matched cohort (n=29 per group).
CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to PCV mode, PSV mode was significantly associated with NIV success in the intensive care unit setting, particularly when large leaks were not a major concern. Nevertheless, further well-designed multicenter, protocol-driven randomized controlled trials are warranted.
METHODS: This was a prospective multicentre observational study of NIV use for acute respiratory failure (ARF) in adult patients. We compared the two pressure-targeted modes in terms of NIV success and complication rates.
RESULTS: Among 176 patients receiving NIV, 88 patients were included in the study (PCV mode, n=29; PSV mode, n=59). The study population had a median age of 73.0 years and median body mass index of 20.8 kg/m2. The applied inspiratory positive airway pressure (IPAP) was higher in patients with PCV than in those with PSV [18.0 cmH2O (15.0-20.5 cmH2O) vs. 15.0 cmH2O (12.0-17.0 cmH2O), respectively, P=0.001]. More patients with PCV received sedatives and experienced dry mouth than those with PSV; however, the incidences of large leaks were low in both groups (n=5 vs. n=2, respectively). With regard to NIV outcomes, 24 (27.2%) patients experienced NIV failure and 13 (14.8%) died in hospital. PSV mode was a significant factor for NIV success [odds ratio (OR), 2.303; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.216 to 4.360] in multivariate analyses and this association remained significant in a 1:1 matched cohort (n=29 per group).
CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to PCV mode, PSV mode was significantly associated with NIV success in the intensive care unit setting, particularly when large leaks were not a major concern. Nevertheless, further well-designed multicenter, protocol-driven randomized controlled trials are warranted.