Dataset Information

The comparative effectiveness of noninvasive and invasive ventilation in patients with pneumonia.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE:To compare the outcomes of patients hospitalized with pneumonia treated with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). MATERIALS AND METHODS:Using the HealthFacts multihospital electronic medical record database, we included patients hospitalized with a diagnosis of pneumonia and treated with NIV or IMV. We developed a propensity model for receipt of initial NIV and assessed the outcomes in a propensity-matched cohort, and in a covariate adjusted and propensity score weighted models. RESULTS:Among 3971 ventilated patients, 1109 (27.9%) were initially treated with NIV. Patients treated with NIV were older, had lower acuity of illness score, and were more likely to have congestive heart failure and chronic pulmonary disease. Mortality was 15.8%, 29.8% and 25.9.0% among patients treated with initial NIV, initial IMV and among those with NIV failure. In the propensity matched analysis, the risk of death was lower in patients treated with NIV (relative risk: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.59-0.85). Subgroup analysis showed that NIV was beneficial among patients with cardiopulmonary comorbidities (relative risk 0.59, 95% CI: 0.47-0.75) but not in those without (relative risk 0.96, 95% CI: 0.74-0.1.25)NIV failure was significantly (p=0.002) more common in patients without cardiopulmonary conditions (21.3%) compared to those with these conditions (13.8%). CONCLUSIONS:Initial NIV was associated with better survival among the subgroup of patients hospitalized with pneumonia who had COPD or heart failure. Patients who failed NIV had high in-hospital mortality, emphasizing the importance of careful patient selection monitoring when managing severe pneumonia with NIV.

SUBMITTER: Stefan MS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5700851 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The comparative effectiveness of noninvasive and invasive ventilation in patients with pneumonia.

Stefan Mihaela S MS Priya Aruna A Pekow Penelope S PS Lagu Tara T Steingrub Jay S JS Hill Nicholas S NS Nathanson Brian H BH Lindenauer Peter K PK

Journal of critical care 20170523

<h4>Purpose</h4>To compare the outcomes of patients hospitalized with pneumonia treated with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV).<h4>Materials and methods</h4>Using the HealthFacts multihospital electronic medical record database, we included patients hospitalized with a diagnosis of pneumonia and treated with NIV or IMV. We developed a propensity model for receipt of initial NIV and assessed the outcomes in a propensity-matched cohort, and in a covariate adju ...[more]

PMID: 28915393

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Despite increasing use, evidence is mixed as to the appropriate use of noninvasive ventilation in patients with pneumonia. We aimed to determine the relationship between receipt of noninvasive ventilation and outcomes for patients with pneumonia in a real-world setting. DESIGN, SETTING, PATIENTS:We performed a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries (aged > 64 yr) admitted to 2,757 acute-care hospitals in the United States with pneumonia, who received mechanical ventilation from 2010 to 2011. EXPOSURES:Noninvasive ventilation versus invasive mechanical ventilation. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS:The primary outcome was 30-day mortality with Medicare reimbursement as a secondary outcome. To account for unmeasured confounding associated with noninvasive ventilation use, an instrumental variable was used-the differential distance to a high noninvasive ventilation use hospital. All models were adjusted for patient and hospital characteristics to account for measured differences between groups. Among 65,747 Medicare beneficiaries with pneumonia who required mechanical ventilation, 12,480 (19%) received noninvasive ventilation. Patients receiving noninvasive ventilation were more likely to be older, male, white, rural-dwelling, have fewer comorbidities, and were less likely to be acutely ill as measured by organ failures. Results of the instrumental variable analysis suggested that, among marginal patients, receipt of noninvasive ventilation was not significantly associated with differences in 30-day mortality when compared with invasive mechanical ventilation (54% vs 55%; p = 0.92; 95% CI of absolute difference, -13.8 to 12.4) but was associated with significantly lower Medicare spending ($18,433 vs $27,051; p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS:Among Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized with pneumonia who received mechanical ventilation, noninvasive ventilation use was not associated with a real-world mortality benefit. Given the wide CIs, however, substantial harm associated with noninvasive ventilation could not be excluded. The use of noninvasive ventilation for patients with pneumonia should be cautioned, but targeted enrollment of marginal patients with pneumonia could enrich future randomized trials.

Project description:BackgroundVery old patients (≥ 80 years-old, VOP) are increasingly admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a common reason for admission and the best strategy of support for respiratory failure in this scenario is not fully known. We evaluated whether noninvasive ventilation (NIV) would be beneficial compared to invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) regarding hospital mortality.MethodsMulticenter cohort study of VOPs admitted with CAP in need of IMV or NIV to 11 Brazilian ICUs from 2009 through 2012. We used logistic regression models to evaluate the association between the initial ventilatory strategy (NIV vs. IMV) and hospital mortality adjusting for confounding factors. We evaluated effect modification with interaction terms in pre-specified sub-groups.ResultsOf 369 VOPs admitted for CAP with respiratory failure, 232 (63%) received NIV and 137 (37%) received IMV as initial ventilatory strategy. IMV patients were sicker at baseline (median SOFA 8 vs. 4). Hospital mortality was 114/232 (49%) for NIV and 90/137 (66%) for IMV. For the comparison NIV vs. IMV (reference), the crude odds ratio (OR) was 0.50 (95% CI, 0.33-0.78, p = 0.002). This association was largely confounded by antecedent characteristics and non-respiratory SOFA (adjOR = 0.70, 95% CI, 0.41-1.20, p = 0.196). The fully adjusted model, additionally including Pao2/Fio2 ratio, pH and Paco2, yielded an adjOR of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.46-1.41, p = 0.452). There was no strong evidence of effect modification among relevant subgroups, such as Pao2/Fio2 ratio ≤ 150 (p = 0.30), acute respiratory acidosis (p = 0.42) and non-respiratory SOFA ≥ 4 (p = 0.53).ConclusionsNIV was not associated with lower hospital mortality when compared to IMV in critically ill VOP admitted with CAP, but there was no strong signal of harm from its use. The main confounders of this association were both the severity of respiratory dysfunction and of extra-respiratory organ failures.

Project description:Many intensive care unit patients who undergo endotracheal extubation experience extubation failure and require reintubation. Because of the high mortality rate associated with reintubation, postextubation respiratory management is crucial, especially for high-risk populations. We conducted the present study to compare the effectiveness of oxygen therapy administered using high-flow nasal cannulae (HFNC) and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) in preventing reintubation among patients receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation (PMV). This single-center, prospective, unblinded randomized controlled trial was at the respiratory care center (RCC). Participants were randomized to an HFNC group or an NIPPV group (20 patients in each) and received noninvasive respiratory support (NRS) administered using their assigned method. The primary outcome was reintubation within7 days after extubation. None of the patients in the NIPPV group required reintubation, whereas 5 (25%) of the patients in the HFNC group required reintubation (P = 0.047). The 90-day mortality rates of the NIPPV and HFNC groups (four patients [20%] vs. two patients [10%], respectively) did not differ significantly. No significant differences in length of RCC stay, length of hospital stay, time to liberation from NRS, and ventilator-free days at 28-day were identified. The time to event outcome analysis also revealed that the risk of reintubation in the HFNC group was higher than that in the NIPPV group (P = 0.018). Although HFNC is becoming increasingly common as a form of postextubation NRS, HFNC may not be as effective as NIPPV in preventing reintubation among patients who have been receiving PMV for at least 2 weeks. Additional studies evaluating HFNC as an alternative to NIPPV for patients receiving PMV are warranted.ClinicalTrial.gov ID: NCT04564859; IRB number: 20160901R.Trial registration: ClinicalTrial.gov ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04564859 ).

Project description:IMPORTANCE:Small clinical trials have shown that noninvasive ventilation (NIV) is efficacious in reducing the need for intubation and improving short-term survival among patients with severe exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Little is known, however, about the effectiveness of NIV in routine clinical practice. OBJECTIVE:To compare the outcomes of patients with COPD treated with NIV to those treated with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:This was a retrospective cohort study of 25?628 patients hospitalized for exacerbation of COPD who received mechanical ventilation on the first or second hospital day at 420 US hospitals participating in the Premier Inpatient Database. EXPOSURES:Initial ventilation strategy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:In-hospital mortality, hospital-acquired pneumonia, hospital length of stay and cost, and 30-day readmission. RESULTS:In the study population, a total of 17?978 (70%) were initially treated with NIV on hospital day 1 or 2. When compared with those initially treated with IMV, NIV-treated patients were older, had less comorbidity, and were less likely to have concomitant pneumonia present on admission. In a propensity-adjusted analysis, NIV was associated with lower risk of mortality than IMV (odds ratio [OR] 0.54; [95% CI, 0.48-0.61]). Treatment with NIV was associated with lower risk of hospital-acquired pneumonia (OR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.44-0.64]), lower costs (ratio, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.67-0.69]), and a shorter length of stay (ratio, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.79-0.82]), but no difference in 30-day all-cause readmission (OR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.94-1.15]) or COPD-specific readmission (OR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.91-1.22]). Propensity matching attenuated these associations. The benefits of NIV were similar in a sample restricted to patients younger than 85 years and were attenuated among patients with higher levels of comorbidity and concomitant pneumonia. Using the hospital as an instrumental variable, the strength of association between NIV and mortality was modestly attenuated (OR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.47-0.91]). In sensitivity analyses, the benefit of NIV was robust in the face of a strong hypothetical unmeasured confounder. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:In a large retrospective cohort study, patients with COPD treated with NIV at the time of hospitalization had lower inpatient mortality, shorter length of stay, and lower costs compared with those treated with IMV.

Dataset Information

The comparative effectiveness of noninvasive and invasive ventilation in patients with pneumonia.

Publications

The comparative effectiveness of noninvasive and invasive ventilation in patients with pneumonia.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets