Noninvasive Mechanical Ventilation with Average Volume-Assured Pressure Support versus BiPAP S/T in De Novo Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure.

IF 1.8 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Critical Care Research and Practice Pub Date : 2022-08-03 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1155/2022/4333345
Killen H Briones-Claudett, Mónica H Briones-Claudett, Mariuxi Del Pilar Cabrera Baños, Killen H Briones Zamora, Diana C Briones Marquez, Luc J I Zimmermann, Antonio W D Gavilanes, Michelle Grunauer
{"title":"Noninvasive Mechanical Ventilation with Average Volume-Assured Pressure Support versus BiPAP S/T in De Novo Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure.","authors":"Killen H Briones-Claudett, Mónica H Briones-Claudett, Mariuxi Del Pilar Cabrera Baños, Killen H Briones Zamora, Diana C Briones Marquez, Luc J I Zimmermann, Antonio W D Gavilanes, Michelle Grunauer","doi":"10.1155/2022/4333345","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Bilevel positive airway pressure in spontaneous/time and average volume-assured pressure support (BiPAP·S/T-AVAPS) could maintain an adequate tidal volume by reducing the patient's inspiratory effort; however, this ventilatory strategy has not been compared with other ventilatory modes, especially the conventional BiPAP S/T mode, when noninvasive mechanical ventilation (NIMV) is used. The primary objective of this study was to determine the rate of success and failure of the use of BiPAP·S/T-AVAPS versus BiPAP·S/T alone in patients with mild-to-moderate \"de novo\" hypoxemic respiratory failure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a matched-cohort study. Subjects with mild-to-moderate de novo hypoxemic respiratory failure were divided into two groups according to the ventilatory strategy used. The subjects in the BiPAP·S/T group were paired with those in the BiPAP·S/T-AVAPS group.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 58 subjects were studied. Twenty-nine subjects in the BiPAP·S/T group were paired with 29 subjects in the BiPAP·S/T-AVAPS group. Twenty patients (34.5%) presented with \"failure of NIMV,\" while 38 (65.5%) patients did not. In addition, 13 (22.4%) patients died, while 45 (77.6%) recovered. No differences were found in the percentage of intubation (<i>P</i>=0.44) and mortality (<i>P</i>=0.1).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The BiPAP S/T-AVAPS ventilator mode was not superior to the BiPAP·S/T mode. A high mortality rate was observed in patients with NIMV failure in both modes. This trial is registered with https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN17904857.</p>","PeriodicalId":46583,"journal":{"name":"Critical Care Research and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9365614/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Care Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4333345","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Bilevel positive airway pressure in spontaneous/time and average volume-assured pressure support (BiPAP·S/T-AVAPS) could maintain an adequate tidal volume by reducing the patient's inspiratory effort; however, this ventilatory strategy has not been compared with other ventilatory modes, especially the conventional BiPAP S/T mode, when noninvasive mechanical ventilation (NIMV) is used. The primary objective of this study was to determine the rate of success and failure of the use of BiPAP·S/T-AVAPS versus BiPAP·S/T alone in patients with mild-to-moderate "de novo" hypoxemic respiratory failure.

Methods: This was a matched-cohort study. Subjects with mild-to-moderate de novo hypoxemic respiratory failure were divided into two groups according to the ventilatory strategy used. The subjects in the BiPAP·S/T group were paired with those in the BiPAP·S/T-AVAPS group.

Results: A total of 58 subjects were studied. Twenty-nine subjects in the BiPAP·S/T group were paired with 29 subjects in the BiPAP·S/T-AVAPS group. Twenty patients (34.5%) presented with "failure of NIMV," while 38 (65.5%) patients did not. In addition, 13 (22.4%) patients died, while 45 (77.6%) recovered. No differences were found in the percentage of intubation (P=0.44) and mortality (P=0.1).

Conclusion: The BiPAP S/T-AVAPS ventilator mode was not superior to the BiPAP·S/T mode. A high mortality rate was observed in patients with NIMV failure in both modes. This trial is registered with https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN17904857.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在新发低氧血症性呼吸衰竭中使用平均容积保证压力支持的无创机械通气与 BiPAP S/T 相比较。
背景:双水平气道正压(BiPAP-S/T-AVAPS)可通过减少患者的吸气努力来维持足够的潮气量;然而,在使用无创机械通气(NIMV)时,这种通气策略尚未与其他通气模式(尤其是传统的 BiPAP S/T 模式)进行比较。本研究的主要目的是确定在轻度至中度 "新生 "低氧血症呼吸衰竭患者中使用 BiPAP-S/T-AVAPS 与单独使用 BiPAP-S/T 的成功率和失败率:这是一项匹配队列研究。根据使用的通气策略,轻度至中度新发低氧血症呼吸衰竭受试者被分为两组。BiPAP-S/T 组的受试者与 BiPAP-S/T-AVAPS 组的受试者配对:共有 58 名受试者接受了研究。BiPAP-S/T组的29名受试者与BiPAP-S/T-AVAPS组的29名受试者配对。20名患者(34.5%)出现 "NIMV失败",38名患者(65.5%)没有出现 "NIMV失败"。此外,13 名患者(22.4%)死亡,45 名患者(77.6%)康复。在插管比例(P=0.44)和死亡率(P=0.1)方面没有发现差异:结论:BiPAP S/T-AVAPS 呼吸机模式并不优于 BiPAP-S/T 模式。结论:BiPAP S/T-AVAPS 呼吸机模式并不优于 BiPAP-S/T 模式,两种模式下 NIMV 失效患者的死亡率都很高。该试验已在 https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN17904857 上注册。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Critical Care Research and Practice
Critical Care Research and Practice CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Assessment of Satisfaction Levels Among Families of Intensive Care Unit Patients in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study. Serum Concentration at 24 h With Intensive Beta-Lactam Therapy in Sepsis and Septic Shock: A Prospective Study: Beta-Lactam Blood Levels in Sepsis. Assessing the Impact of Simulation-Based Learning on Student Satisfaction and Self-Confidence in Critical Care Medicine. A Comparison of the Outcomes of COVID-19 Vaccinated and Nonvaccinated Patients Admitted to an Intensive Care Unit in a Low-Middle-Income Country. Dyschloremia and Renal Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients With Sepsis: A Prospective Cohort Study: Dyschloremia and Renal Outcomes in Sepsis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1