Non invasive spontaneous dual ventilation in critically ill patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Comparing effectiveness of intelligent volume-assured pressure support (iVAPS) vs bi-level positive airway pressure spontaneous/timed (BPAP S/T) for hypercapnic respiratory failure in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Intelligent volume-assured pressure support (iVAPS) is a relatively new hybrid mode of non-invasive ventilation (NIV). There is still limited evidence for iVAPS. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of iVAPS to that of bi-level positive airway pressure spontaneous/timed (BPAP S/T) in patients with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure or acute-on-chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure caused by acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) in the emergency department.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was an observational, retrospective study. Eighty-two patients with hypercapnic respiratory failure caused by AECOPD, who were admitted to our emergency department, were analysed. Arterial blood gas (ABG) parameters, length of hospital stay and rate of intensive care unit (ICU) admission were compared between iVAPS and BPAP S/T.

RESULTS

A total of 82 patients (26 females, 56 males, mean age 68.26 ± 11.63 years) who were treated with iVAPS (N = 26) or BPAP S/T (N = 56) were enrolled. There were no significant differences between two modes with respect to demographics such as age, gender, presence of comorbidity, usage of long-term oxygen therapy or NIV, and the baseline ABG parameters. The presence of pneumonia was significantly higher in BPAP S/T (P = .01). The rate of ICU admission was 26.9% in iVAPS vs 25% in BPAP S/T. The mean length of hospital stay was 11.5 ± 12.3 days in iVAPS and 9.7 ± 7.4 days in BPAP S/T (P = .53). The mean values of ABG parameters at the 1st and 24th hours of NIV therapy did not differ in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Both modes were similarly effective in the management of appropriately selected patients with hypercapnic respiratory failure caused by AECOPD. Hence, we underline that NIV mode selection in the emergency department should be performed in line with experiences of clinicians/institutions and accessibility of ventilator devices/modes.

Effects of volume-assured pressure support noninvasive ventilation in stable COPD with chronic respiratory failure: Meta-analysis and literature review

BACKGROUND

Patients receiving long-term home noninvasive ventilation (NIV) may slow down the progression to acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD), however, the problem with respiratory instability during sleep diminished was persisted, which may reduce the effectiveness of NIV and the patient's quality of life. A novel NIV mode with volume-assured pressure support (VAPS) has been gradually applied to improve sleep quality in COPD patients with chronic respiratory failure. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of VAPS in stable COPD patients with chronic respiratory failure.

METHODS

We performed an electronic literature search for RCTs from January 2008 to October 2018. Studies investigating the effects of VAPS in stable COPD patients with chronic respiratory failure were conducted, and the following primary outcomes were reviewed: effectiveness of ventilation, sleep quality, and quality of life.

RESULTS

Five studies with 150 subjects were identified. While questionnaire scores showed significant improvements in the VAPS mode, no significant difference was found in the effectiveness of ventilation (pH, MD = 0.01 [95% CI -0.01 to 0.02, P = 0.27]; PaCO₂, MD = 1.25 [95% CI -1.45 to 3.95, P = 0.37]; PaO₂, MD = 3.14 [95% CI -0.76 to 7.05, P = 0.11]; mSaO₂, MD = 0.23 [95% CI -1.22 to 1.67, P = 0.76]; mPtcCO₂, MD = 3.03 [95% CI -6.06 to- 0.60, P = 0.10]). The VAPS mode did not seem to ameliorate sleep quality and quality of life.

CONCLUSION

The VAPS mode had similar efficacy as the pressure-support (PS) mode. However, VAPS could significantly improve the patients' subjective feelings.

Automatic EPAP intelligent volume-assured pressure support is effective in patients with chronic respiratory failure: A randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Patients with chronic respiratory failure are increasingly managed with domiciliary non-invasive ventilation (NIV). There may be limited ability to provide NIV titration for these complex patients, and ventilatory requirements and upper airway support needs may change over time. Therefore, an automatically adjusting expiratory positive airway pressure (AutoEPAP) algorithm may offer advantages over manually adjusted EPAP for treating these patients. This study compared 4% oxygen desaturation index (ODI4%) values during the use of an AutoEPAP algorithm versus manual EPAP titration with the intelligent volume-assured pressure support (iVAPS) algorithm.

METHODS

This prospective, single-blind, randomized, crossover study was conducted at six US sites. Patients with chronic respiratory failure (neuromuscular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, obesity hypoventilation and other aetiologies) and an apnoea-hypopnoea index of >5/h who were already established NIV users underwent a single night of NIV with the iVAPS manual EPAP and iVAPS AutoEPAP in the sleep laboratory in random order.

RESULTS

A total of 38 patients constituted the study population. Mean ODI4% was statistically non-inferior with AutoEPAP versus manual EPAP (P < 0.0001). There was no difference in the effect on ODI4% across respiratory failure subgroups. Ventilation parameters and gas exchange were similar with either NIV mode, indicating equally effective treatment of respiratory failure. Sleep parameters were improved during AutoEPAP versus manual EPAP.

CONCLUSION

A single night of NIV using the iVAPS with AutoEPAP algorithm was non-inferior to a single night of iVAPS with manual EPAP titration in patients with respiratory failure.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02683772 at clinicaltrials.gov.