We have located links that may give you full text access.
Clinical Trial
Comparative Study
English Abstract
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
[Study of the use of noninvasive ventilation of the lungs in acute respiratory insufficiency due exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease].
Anesteziologiia i Reanimatologiia 1998 May
Noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV) is a life-saving procedure in acute respiratory failure (ARF), but its technique is not yet in routine use in many respiratory centers. We carried out a prospective randomized study comparing the combination of NPPV with conventional therapy (oxygen, bronchodilators, steroids, and theophylline) with conventional therapy alone in patients with acute respiratory failure caused by exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). A total of 58 patients were recruited from a large group of patients admitted to our hospital between September 1995 and March 1997. Twenty-nine patients were randomly assigned to the NPPV group and 29 to the conventional (non-NPPV) group. The patients were matched for demographic and physiological norm values (mean age 63.4 +/- 5.5 vs. 66.2 +/- 7.1 years, mean FEV1 0.68 +/- 0.15 vs. 0.74 +/- 0.16 L, PaO2 51.4 +/- 6.8 vs. 52.3 +/- 6.5 mm Hg, PaCO2 63.4 +/- 10.9 vs. 64.9 +/- 9.7 mm Hg, and pH 7.28 +/- 0.07 vs. 7.26 +/- 0.06). The outcome end points were needed for endotracheal intubation, length of hospital stay, and incidence of complications. NPPV was administered using BiPAP ventilatory device (Respironics, Inc.) by spontaneous and spontaneous/timed modes via nasal and facial masks. The mean time of NPPV was 29 +/- 25 h. Three patients refused from NPPV because of intolerance of mask or ventilation procedure. Two of them were eventually intubated and one of them died. In patients administered NPPV, we observed a significant rise of pH and fall of PaCO2 after 1 h of ventilation, in contrast to the non-NPPV group (7.34 +/ 0.09 vs. 7.21 +/- 0.08, p < 0.05; 53.2 +/- 10.7 vs. 71.4 +/- 10.2 mm Hg, p < 0.01, respectively). The need in intubation was lower in the NPPV group as compared to the reference group (12 vs. 28%, p = 0.18), mortality rate was higher in the non-NPPV group (31 vs. 8%, p = 0.03), and hospital stay was shorter in NPPV patients (26 +/- 7 vs. 34 +/- 10 days). The incidence of complications was lower in the NPPV group, they were less significant, and did not involve discontinuation of ventilation. Hence, NPPV is a first-line therapy in patients with ARF caused by COPD exacerbation, due to obvious advantages over conventional methods of treatment.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
Perioperative echocardiographic strain analysis: what anesthesiologists should know.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 April 11
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
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
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