scholarly journals The generalizability of randomized controlled trials investigating non‐invasive ventilation in patients with COPD

Respirology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (10) ◽  
pp. 1031-1032
Author(s):  
Kathryn Le Grice ◽  
Neeraj M. Shah ◽  
Catey Bunce ◽  
Eui‐Sik Suh
2006 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 96-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsten L. Gruis ◽  
Devin L. Brown ◽  
Kevin J. Weatherwax ◽  
Eva L. Feldman ◽  
Ronald D. Chervin

Trials ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  

AbstractChronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is expected to be the 3rd leading cause of death worldwide by 2020. Despite improvements in survival by using acute non-invasive ventilation (NIV) to treat patients with exacerbations of COPD complicated by acute hypercapnic respiratory failure (AHRF), these patients are at high risk of readmission and further life-threatening events, including death. Recent studies suggested that NIV at home can reduce readmissions, but in a small proportion of patients, and with a high level of expertise. Other studies, however, do not show any benefit of home NIV. This could be related to the fact that respiratory failure in patients with stable COPD and their response to mechanical ventilation are influenced by several pathophysiological factors which frequently coexist in the same patient to varying degrees. These pathophysiological factors might influence the success of home NIV in stable COPD, thus long-term NIV specifically adapted to a patient’s “phenotype” is likely to improve prognosis, reduce readmission to hospital, and prevent death. In view of this conundrum, Rescue2-monitor (R2M), an open-label, prospective randomized, controlled study performed in patients with hypercapnic COPD post-AHRF, will investigate the impact of the quality of nocturnal NIV on the readmission-free survival. The primary objective is to show that any of 3 home NIV strategies (“rescue,” “non-targeted,” and “targeted”) will improve readmission-free survival in comparison to no-home NIV. The “targeted” group of patients will receive a treatment with personalized (targeted) ventilation settings and extensive monitoring. Furthermore, the influence of comorbidities typical for COPD patients, such as cardiac insufficiency, OSA, or associated asthma, on ventilation outcomes will be taken into consideration and reasons for non-inclusion of patients will be recorded in order to evaluate the percentage of ventilated COPD patients that are screening failures. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03890224. Registered on March 26, 2019.


Thorax ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. thoraxjnl-2020-215613
Author(s):  
Marius Lebret ◽  
Antoine Léotard ◽  
Jean Louis Pépin ◽  
Wolfram Windisch ◽  
Emelie Ekkernkamp ◽  
...  

BackgroundThe optimal interface for the delivery of home non-invasive ventilation (NIV) to treat chronic respiratory failure has not yet been determined. The aim of this individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis was to compare the effect of nasal and oronasal masks on treatment efficacy and adherence in patients with COPD and obesity hypoventilation syndrome (OHS).MethodsWe searched Medline and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for prospective randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of at least 1 month’s duration, published between January 1994 and April 2019, that assessed NIV efficacy in patients with OHS and COPD. The main outcomes were diurnal PaCO2, PaO2 and NIV adherence (PROSPERO CRD42019132398).FindingsOf 1576 articles identified, 34 RCTs met the inclusion criteria and IPD were obtained for 18. Ten RCTs were excluded because only one type of mask was used, or mask data were missing. Data from 8 RCTs, including 290 IPD, underwent meta-analysis. Oronasal masks were used in 86% of cases. There were no differences between oronasal and nasal masks for PaCO2 (0.61 mm Hg (95% CI −2.15 to 3.38); p=0.68), PaO2 (−0.00 mm Hg (95% CI −4.59 to 4.58); p=1) or NIV adherence (0·29 hour/day (95% CI −0.74 to 1.32); p=0.58). There was no interaction between the underlying pathology and the effect of mask type on any outcome.InterpretationOronasal masks are the most used interface for the delivery of home NIV in patients with OHS and COPD; however, there is no difference in the efficacy or tolerance of oronasal or nasal masks.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document