Evaluation Of The Efficacy Of Four Different Non-invasive Ventilation Modes Performed In The Delivery Room

Author(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Masaaki Sakuraya ◽  
Hiromu Okano ◽  
Tomoyuki Masuyama ◽  
Shunsuke Kimata ◽  
Satoshi Hokari

Abstract Background Although non-invasive respiratory management strategies have been implemented to avoid intubation, patients with de novo acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure (AHRF) are high risk of treatment failure. In the previous meta-analyses, the effect of non-invasive ventilation was not evaluated according to ventilation modes in those patients. Furthermore, no meta-analyses comparing non-invasive respiratory management strategies with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) have been reported. We performed a network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of non-invasive ventilation according to ventilation modes with high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO), standard oxygen therapy (SOT), and IMV in adult patients with AHRF. Methods The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Ichushi databases were searched. Studies including adults with AHRF and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing two different respiratory management strategies (continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), pressure support ventilation (PSV), HFNO, SOT, or IMV) were reviewed. Results We included 25 RCTs (3,302 participants: 27 comparisons). Using SOT as the reference, CPAP (risk ratio [RR] 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.31–0.95; very low certainty) was associated significantly with a lower risk of mortality. Compared with SOT, PSV (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.62–1.06; low certainty) and HFNO (RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.65–1.25; very low certainty) were not associated with a significantly lower risk of mortality. Compared with IMV, no non-invasive respiratory management was associated with a significantly lower risk of mortality, although all certainties of evidence were very low. The probability of being best in reducing short-term mortality among all possible interventions was higher for CPAP, followed by PSV and HFNO; IMV and SOT were tied for the worst (surface under the cumulative ranking curve value: 93.2, 65.0, 44.1, 23.9, and 23.9, respectively). Conclusions When performing non-invasive ventilation among patients with de novo AHRF, it is important to avoid excessive tidal volume and lung injury. Although pressure support is needed for some of these patients, it should be applied with caution because this may lead to excessive tidal volume and lung injury. Trial registration protocols.io (Protocol integer ID 49375, April 23, 2021). 10.17504/protocols.io.buf7ntrn.


2020 ◽  
Vol 110 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Teresa Diaz de Teran ◽  
Elena Barbagelata ◽  
Catia Cilloniz ◽  
Antonello Nicolini ◽  
Tommaso Perazzo ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document