Comparison Between Limited Driving Pressure Ventilation and Conventional Mechanical Ventilation Strategies in Medical Intensive Care Patients With Acute Respiratory Failure

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Respiratory Failure ◽  
Acute Respiratory Failure ◽  
Conventional Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Driving Pressure ◽  
Intensive Care Patients ◽  
Ventilation Strategies ◽  
Medical Intensive Care

Comparative study between noninvasive positive pressure ventilation and invasive mechanical ventilation in patients with respiratory failure

QJM ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 114 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammed N Al Shafi'i ◽  
Doaa M. Kamal El-din ◽  
Mohammed A. Abdulnaiem Ismaiel ◽  
Hesham M Abotiba
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Respiratory Failure ◽  
Acute Respiratory Failure ◽  
Positive Pressure Ventilation ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Noninvasive Positive Pressure Ventilation ◽  
Positive Pressure ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background Noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) has been increasingly used in the management of respiratory failure in intensive care unit (ICU). Aim of the Work is to compare the efficacy and resource consumption of NIPPMV delivered through face mask against invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) delivered by endotracheal tube in the management of patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF). Patients and Methods This prospective randomized controlled study included 78 adults with acute respiratory failure who were admitted to the intensive care unit. The enrolled patients were randomly allocated to receive either noninvasive ventilation or conventional mechanical ventilation (CMV). Results Severity of illness, measured by the simplified acute physiologic score 3 (SAPS 3), were comparable between the two patient groups with no significant difference between them. Both study groups showed a comparable steady improvement in PaO2:FiO2 values, indicating that NIPPV is as effective as CMV in improving the oxygenation of patients with ARF. The PaCO2 and pH values gradually improved in both groups during the 48 hours of ventilation. 12 hours after ventilation, NIPPMV group showed significantly more improvement in PaCO2 and pH than the CMV group. The respiratory acidosis was corrected in the NIPPV group after 24 hours of ventilation compared with 36 hours in the CMV group. NIPPV in this study was associated with a lower frequency of complications than CMV, including ventilator acquired pneumonia (VAP), sepsis, renal failure, pulmonary embolism, and pancreatitis. However, only VAP showed a statistically significant difference. Patients who underwent NIPPV in this study had lower mortality, and lower ventilation time and length of ICU stay, compared with patients on CMV. Intubation was required for less than a third of patients who initially underwent NIV. Conclusion Based on our study findings, NIPPV appears to be a potentially effective and safe therapeutic modality for managing patients with ARF.

Noninvasive vs Conventional Mechanical Ventilation in Acute Respiratory Failure

CHEST Journal ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 128 (6) ◽  
pp. 3916-3924 ◽  
Author(s):  
Teresa Honrubia ◽  
Fernando J. García López ◽  
Nieves Franco ◽  
Margarita Mas ◽  
Marcela Guevara ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Respiratory Failure ◽  
Acute Respiratory Failure ◽  
Conventional Mechanical Ventilation

scholarly journals Association of weaning preparedness with extubation outcome of mechanically ventilated patients in medical intensive care units: a retrospective analysis

PeerJ ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. e8973
Author(s):  
Feng-Ching Lin ◽  
Yao-Wen Kuo ◽  
Jih-Shuin Jerng ◽  
Huey-Dong Wu
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Respiratory Failure ◽  
Acute Respiratory Failure ◽  
Intensive Care Units ◽  
Extubation Failure ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated Patients ◽  
Failure Group ◽  
Medical Intensive Care ◽  
Ventilated Patients

Background Assessment of preparedness of weaning has been recommended before extubation for mechanically ventilated patients. We aimed to understand the association of a structured assessment of weaning preparedness with successful liberation. Methods We retrospectively investigated patients with acute respiratory failure who experienced an extubation trial at the medical intensive care units of a medical center and compared the demographic and clinical characteristics between those patients with successful and failed extubation. A composite score to assess the preparedness of weaning, the WEANSNOW score, was generated consisting of eight components, including Weaning parameters, Endotracheal tube, Arterial blood gas analysis, Nutrition, Secretions, Neuromuscular-affecting agents, Obstructive airway problems and Wakefulness. The prognostic ability of the WEANSNOW score for extubation was then analyzed. Results Of the 205 patients included, 138 (67.3%) patients had successful extubation. Compared with the failure group, the success group had a significantly shorter duration of MV before the weaning attempt (11.2 ± 11.6 vs. 31.7 ± 26.2 days, p < 0.001), more with congestive heart failure (42.0% vs. 25.4%, p = 0.020), and had different distribution of the types of acute respiratory failure (p = 0.037). The failure group also had a higher WEANSNOW score (1.22 ± 0.85 vs. 0.51 ± 0.71, p < 0.001) and worse Rapid Shallow Breathing Index (93.9 ± 63.8 vs. 56.3 ± 35.1, p < 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that a WEANSNOW Score = 1 or higher (OR = 2.880 (95% CI [1.291–6.426]), p = 0.010) and intubation duration >21 days (OR = 7.752 (95% CI [3.560–16.879]), p < 0.001) were independently associated with an increased probability of extubation failure. Conclusion Assessing the pre-extubation status of intubated patients in a checklist-based approach using the WEANSNOW score might provide valuable insights into extubation failure in patients in a medical ICU for acute respiratory failure. Further prospective studies are warranted to elucidate the practice of assessing weaning preparedness.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document