The Long-term Efficacy of Domiciliary Noninvasive Positive-Pressure Ventilation in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
We evaluated the long-term effects of domiciliary noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NIPPV) used to treat patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).Methods
Databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials of COPD with NIPPV for longer than 1 year. Mortality rates were the primary outcome in this meta-analysis. The eight trials included in this study comprised data from 913 patients.Results
The mortality rates for the NIPPV and control groups were 29% (118/414) and 36% (151/419), suggesting a statistically significant difference (risk ratio [RR], 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65-0.95). Mortality rates were reduced with NIPPV in four trials that included stable COPD patients. There was no difference in admission, acute exacerbation and quality of life between the NIPPV and control groups. There was no significant difference in withdrawal rates between the two groups (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.72-1.36; p=0.94).Conclusion
Maintaining long-term nocturnal NIPPV for more than 1 year, especially in patients with stable COPD, decreased the mortality rate, without increasing the withdrawal rate compared with long-term oxygen treatment.
SUBMITTER: Park SY
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8743632 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ImportanceThe association of home noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) with outcomes in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and hypercapnia is uncertain.ObjectiveTo evaluate the association of home NIPPV via bilevel positive airway pressure (BPAP) devices and noninvasive home mechanical ventilator (HMV) devices with clinical outcomes and adverse events in patients with COPD and hypercapnia.Data sourcesSearch of MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Cochrane Central Registrar of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, National Guideline Clearinghouse, and Scopus for English-language articles published from January 1, 1995, to November 6, 2019.Study selectionRandomized clinical trials (RCTs) and comparative observational studies that enrolled adults with COPD with hypercapnia who used home NIPPV for more than 1 month were included.Data extraction and synthesisData extraction was completed by independent pairs of reviewers. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool for RCTs and select items from the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for nonrandomized studies.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcomes were mortality, all-cause hospital admissions, need for intubation, and quality of life at the longest follow-up.ResultsA total of 21 RCTs and 12 observational studies evaluating 51 085 patients (mean [SD] age, 65.7 [2.1] years; 43% women) were included, among whom there were 434 deaths and 27 patients who underwent intubation. BPAP compared with no device was significantly associated with lower risk of mortality (22.31% vs 28.57%; risk difference [RD], -5.53% [95% CI, -10.29% to -0.76%]; odds ratio [OR], 0.66 [95% CI, 0.51-0.87]; P = .003; 13 studies; 1423 patients; strength of evidence [SOE], moderate), fewer patients with all-cause hospital admissions (39.74% vs 75.00%; RD, -35.26% [95% CI, -49.39% to -21.12%]; OR, 0.22 [95% CI, 0.11-0.43]; P < .001; 1 study; 166 patients; SOE, low), and lower need for intubation (5.34% vs 14.71%; RD, -8.02% [95% CI, -14.77% to -1.28%]; OR, 0.34 [95% CI, 0.14-0.83]; P = .02; 3 studies; 267 patients; SOE, moderate). There was no significant difference in the total number of all-cause hospital admissions (rate ratio, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.71-1.17]; P = .47; 5 studies; 326 patients; SOE, low) or quality of life (standardized mean difference, 0.16 [95% CI, -0.06 to 0.39]; P = .15; 9 studies; 833 patients; SOE, insufficient). Noninvasive HMV use compared with no device was significantly associated with fewer all-cause hospital admissions (rate ratio, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.35-0.71]; P < .001; 1 study; 93 patients; SOE, low), but not mortality (21.84% vs 34.09%; RD, -11.99% [95% CI, -24.77% to 0.79%]; OR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.29-1.08]; P = .49; 2 studies; 175 patients; SOE, insufficient). There was no statistically significant difference in the total number of adverse events in patients using NIPPV compared with no device (0.18 vs 0.17 per patient; P = .84; 6 studies; 414 patients).Conclusions and relevanceIn this meta-analysis of patients with COPD and hypercapnia, home BPAP, compared with no device, was associated with lower risk of mortality, all-cause hospital admission, and intubation, but no significant difference in quality of life. Noninvasive HMV, compared with no device, was significantly associated with lower risk of hospital admission, but there was no significant difference in mortality risk. However, the evidence was low to moderate in quality, the evidence on quality of life was insufficient, and the analyses for some outcomes were based on small numbers of studies.
| S-EPMC7042860 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNalmefene is an opioid system modulator with antagonist activity at the μ and δ receptors and partial agonist activity at the κ receptor. Previous studies have suggested that nalmefene could improve respiratory function in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, there is no comprehensive systematic review published regarding the clinical efficacy of nalmefene.MethodsWe explored the following electronic bibliographic databases: EMBASE, Web of Science, PubMed, Wanfang, and Chinese national knowledge infrastructure. To collect data from randomized controlled trials on the therapy of COPD coupled with type II respiratory failure and nalmefene + noninvasive ventilator treatment. The retrieved articles were screened to determine the final inclusion criteria and to extract relevant data, such as the clinical efficacy rate, pulmonary function, blood gas analysis, and adverse reactions. In our study, we used relative risk and weighted mean deviation, as well as a 95% confidence interval for describing nalmefene effectiveness and safety while treating COPD with type II respiratory failure.ResultsThe outcomes of the meta-analysis demonstrated that the clinical efficacy rate of the nalmefene + noninvasive ventilation group was higher than that of the naloxone + noninvasive ventilation and noninvasive ventilation groups. Moreover, the improvement indices of pH value, partial pressure and saturation of blood oxygen, partial pressure of carbon dioxide, and pulmonary function of the nalmefene + noninvasive ventilation group were better than those of the noninvasive ventilation group, and there was no increase in the occurrence of adverse drug reactions.ConclusionNalmefene combined with noninvasive ventilation can significantly improve the blood gas index and lung function in patients with COPD combined with type II respiratory failure.
| S-EPMC10403022 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7543969 | biostudies-literature
Project description:High-intensity (high-pressure and high backup rate) noninvasive ventilation has recently been advocated for the management of stable hypercapnic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, the relative contributions of high inspiratory pressure and high backup rate to ventilator adherence and physiological outcome have not been investigated.Patients with stable hypercapnic COPD (daytime PaCO(2) > 6 kPa) and nocturnal hypoventilation were enrolled. Patients were randomly allocated to high-pressure and high backup rate (high-intensity) and high-pressure and low backup rate (high-pressure) for a 6-week period. At the end of the first treatment period, patients were switched to the alternative treatment. The primary outcome measure was mean nightly ventilator usage.Twelve patients were recruited, with seven completing the 12-week trial protocol. The mean patient age was 71 ± 8 years, with a forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1))/forced vital capacity (FVC) of 50% ± 13% and FEV(1) of 32% ± 12%. The baseline PaCO(2) and PaO(2) were 8.6 ± 1.7 kPa and 7.3 ± 1.4 kPa, respectively. There was no significant difference demonstrated in mean nightly ventilator usage between the high-intensity and high-pressure groups (difference of 4 minutes; 95% confidence interval -45 to 53; P = 0.9). Furthermore, there were no differences in any of the secondary endpoints, with the exception of the respiratory domain of the Severe Respiratory Insufficiency questionnaire, which was lower in the high-intensity arm than in the high-pressure arm (57 ± 11 versus 69 ± 16; P < 0.05).There was no additional benefit, in terms of night-time ventilator adherence or any of the other measured parameters, demonstrated by addition of a high backup rate to high-pressure noninvasive ventilation. These data suggest that it is the high-pressure component of the high-intensity noninvasive ventilation approach that plays the important therapeutic role in the management of hypercapnic respiratory failure in COPD patients.
| S-EPMC3526870 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHigh-intensity noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV) is a novel ventilatory approach to maximally decreasing elevated arterial carbon dioxide tension (PaCO2) toward normocapnia with stepwise up-titration of pressure support. We tested whether high-intensity NPPV is more effective than low-intensity NPPV at decreasing PaCO2, reducing inspiratory effort, alleviating dyspnoea, improving consciousness, and improving NPPV tolerance in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD).MethodsIn this physiological, randomised controlled trial, we assigned 24 AECOPD patients to undergo either high-intensity NPPV (n = 12) or low-intensity NPPV (n = 12). The primary outcome was PaCO2 24 h after randomisation. Secondary outcomes included gas exchange other than PaCO2 24 h after randomisation, inspiratory effort, dyspnoea, consciousness, NPPV tolerance, patient-ventilator asynchrony, cardiac function, ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI), and NPPV-related adverse events.ResultsInspiratory positive airway pressure 24 h after randomisation was significantly higher (28.0 [26.0-28.0] vs. 15.5 [15.0-17.5] cmH2O; p = 0.000) and NPPV duration within the first 24 h was significantly longer (21.8 ± 2.1 vs. 15.3 ± 4.7 h; p = 0.001) in the high-intensity NPPV group. PaCO2 24 h after randomisation decreased to 54.0 ± 11.6 mmHg in the high-intensity NPPV group but only decreased to 67.4 ± 10.6 mmHg in the low-intensity NPPV group (p = 0.008). Inspiratory oesophageal pressure swing, oesophageal pressure-time product (PTPes)/breath, PTPes/min, and PTPes/L were significantly lower in the high-intensity group. Accessory muscle use and dyspnoea score 24 h after randomisation were also significantly lower in that group. No significant between-groups differences were observed in consciousness, NPPV tolerance, patient-ventilator asynchrony, cardiac function, VILI, or NPPV-related adverse events.ConclusionsHigh-intensity NPPV is more effective than low-intensity NPPV at decreasing elevated PaCO2, reducing inspiratory effort, and alleviating dyspnoea in AECOPD patients.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04044625; registered 5 August 2019).
| S-EPMC9120318 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We aimed to investigate whether metabolomic analysis can discriminate acute respiratory failure due to COPD exacerbation from respiratory failure due to heart failure and pneumonia. Since COPD exacerbation is often overdiagnosed, we focused on those COPD exacerbations that were severe enough to require noninvasive mechanical ventilation. We enrolled stable COPD subjects and patients with acute respiratory failure requiring noninvasive mechanical ventilation due to COPD, heart failure, and pneumonia. We excluded subjects with history of both COPD and heart failure and patients with obstructive sleep apnea and obstructive lung disease other than COPD. We performed metabolomics analysis using NMR. We constructed partial least squares discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) models to distinguish metabolic profiles. Serum (p=0.001, R2?=?0.397, Q2?=?0.058) and urine metabolic profiles (p < 0.001, R2?=?0.419, Q2?=?0.142) were significantly different between the four diagnosis groups by PLS-DA. After excluding stable COPD patients, the metabolomes of the various respiratory failure groups did not cluster separately in serum (p=0.2, R2?=?0.631, Q2?=?0.246) or urine (p=0.065, R2?=?0.602, Q2?=?-0.134). However, several metabolites in the serum were reduced in patients with COPD exacerbation and pneumonia. We did not find a metabolic profile unique to COPD exacerbation, but we were able to clearly and reliably distinguish stable COPD patients from patients with respiratory failure in both serum and urine.
| S-EPMC5748128 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The use of domiciliary noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV) in stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure has yielded variable effects on survival, quality of life, and dyspnea. We hypothesized that use of NPPV in stable COPD and partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2) <52 mmHg might result in improvement in quality of life and dyspnea.Thirty patients with stable COPD (forced expiratory volume in the first second <50% predicted and PaCO2 <52 mmHg) were prospectively randomized to receive domiciliary NPPV (bilevel positive airway pressure, 15/5 cm H2O) or usual therapy for 6 months. Measurements were made at baseline, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. Primary outcomes were quality of life as assessed by the Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire (CRQ), and dyspnea as measured by the Transitional Dyspnea Index (TDI).Fifteen subjects in the NPPV arm and 12 controls completed all the study visits. At 6 weeks and 3 months, the NPPV arm showed significant improvement in TDI total score. However, this effect persisted only in the TDI-Task at 6 months (P=0.03). NPPV use was associated with a small improvement in the CRQ-Mastery domain (0.6 versus -0.1, P=0.04). The arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) in the control arm worsened over the period of the study, whereas it remained stable in the NPPV arm (change -7.2 mmHg versus +2.1 mmHg, respectively, P=0.02).NPPV resulted in a small improvement in quality of life indices in stable COPD patients with PaCO2 <52 mmHg. Future larger studies will clarify the role of NPPV in this stable subgroup of patients with COPD.
| S-EPMC3842217 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundAlthough noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) for patients with acute decompensated heart failure was introduced almost 20 years ago, the variation in its use among hospitals remains unknown. We sought to define hospital practice patterns of NIPPV use for acute decompensated heart failure and their relationship with intubation and mortality.Methods and resultsWe conducted a cross-sectional study using a database maintained by Premier, Inc., that includes a date-stamped log of all billed items for hospitalizations at >400 hospitals. We examined hospitalizations for acute decompensated heart failure in this database from 2005 to 2010 and included hospitals with annual average volume of >25 such hospitalizations. We identified 384 hospitals that encompassed 524 430 hospitalizations (median annual average volume: 206). We used hierarchical logistic regression models to calculate hospital-level outcomes: risk-standardized NIPPV rate, risk-standardized intubation rate, and in-hospital risk-standardized mortality rate. We grouped hospitals into quartiles by risk-standardized NIPPV rate and compared risk-standardized mortality rates and risk-standardized intubation rates across quartiles. Median risk-standardized NIPPV rate was 6.2% (interquartile range, 2.8%-9.3%; 5th percentile, 0.2%; 95th percentile, 14.8%). There was no clear pattern of risk-standardized mortality rates across quartiles. The bottom quartile of hospitals had higher risk-standardized intubation rate (11.4%) than each of the other quartiles (9.0%, 9.7%, and 9.1%; P<0.02 for all comparisons).ConclusionsSubstantial variation exists among hospitals in the use of NIPPV for acute decompensated heart failure without evidence for differences in mortality. There may be a threshold effect in relation to intubation rates, with the lowest users of NIPPV having higher intubation rates.
| S-EPMC4386575 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Despite the positive outcomes of the use of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV) in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD), NPPV fails in approximately 15% of patients with AECOPD, possibly because the inspiratory pressure delivered by conventional low-intensity NPPV is insufficient to improve ventilatory status for these patients. High-intensity NPPV, a novel form that delivers high inspiratory pressure, is believed to more efficiently augment alveolar ventilation than low-intensity NPPV, and it has been shown to improve ventilatory status more than low-intensity NPPV in stable AECOPD patients. Whether the application of high-intensity NPPV has therapeutic advantages over low-intensity NPPV in patients with AECOPD remains to be determined. The high-intensity versus low-intensity NPPV in patients with AECOPD (HAPPEN) study will examine whether high-intensity NPPV is more effective for correcting hypercapnia than low-intensity NPPV, hence reducing the need for intubation and improving survival. METHODS/DESIGN:The HAPPEN study is a multicenter, two-arm, single-blind, prospective, randomized controlled trial. In total, 600 AECOPD patients with low to moderate hypercapnic respiratory failure will be included and randomized to receive high-intensity or low-intensity NPPV, with randomization stratified by study center. The primary endpoint is NPPV failure rate, defined as the need for endotracheal intubation and invasive ventilation. Secondary endpoints include the decrement of arterial carbon dioxide tension from baseline to 2 h after randomization, in-hospital and 28-day mortality, and 90-day survival. Patients will be followed up for 90 days after randomization. DISCUSSION:The HAPPEN study will be the first randomized controlled study to investigate whether high-intensity NPPV better corrects hypercapnia and reduces the need for intubation and mortality in AECOPD patients than low-intensity NPPV. The results will help critical care physicians decide the intensity of NPPV delivery to patients with AECOPD. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02985918 . Registered on 7 December 2016.
| S-EPMC6249746 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) is used for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and chronic hypercapnia. However, evidence for clinical efficacy and optimal management of therapy is limited.Target Audience: Patients with COPD, clinicians who care for them, and policy makers.Methods: We summarized evidence addressing five PICO (patients, intervention, comparator, and outcome) questions. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach was used to evaluate the certainty in evidence and generate actionable recommendations. Recommendations were formulated by a panel of pulmonary and sleep physicians, respiratory therapists, and methodologists using the Evidence-to-Decision framework.Recommendations: 1) We suggest the use of nocturnal NIV in addition to usual care for patients with chronic stable hypercapnic COPD (conditional recommendation, moderate certainty); 2) we suggest that patients with chronic stable hypercapnic COPD undergo screening for obstructive sleep apnea before initiation of long-term NIV (conditional recommendation, very low certainty); 3) we suggest not initiating long-term NIV during an admission for acute-on-chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure, favoring instead reassessment for NIV at 2-4 weeks after resolution (conditional recommendation, low certainty); 4) we suggest not using an in-laboratory overnight polysomnogram to titrate NIV in patients with chronic stable hypercapnic COPD who are initiating NIV (conditional recommendation, very low certainty); and 5) we suggest NIV with targeted normalization of PaCO2 in patients with hypercapnic COPD on long-term NIV (conditional recommendation, low certainty).Conclusions: This expert panel provides evidence-based recommendations addressing the use of NIV in patients with COPD and chronic stable hypercapnic respiratory failure.
| S-EPMC7427384 | biostudies-literature