Comparative Study
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

A meta-analysis of noninvasive weaning to facilitate liberation from mechanical ventilation.

PURPOSE: To summarize the evidence comparing noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV) and invasive positive pressure ventilation (IPPV) weaning on mortality, ventilator associated pneumonia and the total duration of mechanical ventilation among invasively ventilated adults with respiratory failure.

SOURCE: Meta-analysis of randomized and quasi-randomized studies comparing early extubation with immediate application of NPPV to IPPV weaning. We selected randomized studies that 1) included adults, with respiratory failure, invasively ventilated for at least 24 hr; 2) compared extubation with immediate application of NPPV to weaning using IPPV; and 3) reported at least one clinically important outcome.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We searched MEDLINE (1966 to 2003), EMBASE (1980 to 2003) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2003) for randomized controlled trials comparing NPPV and IPPV weaning. Additional data sources included personal files, conference proceedings and author contact. Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and abstracted data. Five studies enrolling 171 patients demonstrated that compared to IPPV, noninvasive weaning decreased mortality (relative risk, 0.41 [95% confidence interval [CI] 0.22-0.76]), ventilator associated pneumonia (relative risk, 0.28 [95% CI 0.09-0.85]) and the total duration of mechanical ventilation (weighted mean difference, -7.33 days [95% CI -11.45 to -3.22 days]).

CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of a large randomized controlled trial, this meta-analysis demonstrated a consistent positive effect of noninvasive weaning on mortality. Notwithstanding, the use of NPPV to facilitate weaning, in mechanically ventilated patients, with predominantly chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, is associated with promising, but insufficient, evidence of net clinical benefit at present.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app