Advertisement

Heart Failure Reviews

, Volume 12, Issue 2, pp 119–124 | Cite as

Non-invasive ventilation

  • Josep Masip
Article

Abstract

Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) refers to the delivery of mechanical ventilation to the lungs using techniques that do not require an endotracheal airway. Essentially, there are two modalities: continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and pressure support ventilation (NIPSV). In acute pulmonary edema (APE) both modalities have shown a faster improvement in gas exchange and physiologic parameters with respect to conventional oxygen therapy.

CPAP is a simple technique that may reduce preload and afterload, increasing cardiac output in some patients. It has been successfully used in APE in the last 30 years, demonstrating a reduction in the intubation rate and mortality. The most common level of pressure is 10 cmH2O.

NIPSV is a more complex mode that requires a ventilator and experience. It is usually applied with an expiratory pressure (EPAP or PEEP), resulting in a bilevel pressure modality (BIPAP). This technique has been introduced most recently in APE and has also shown a reduction in the intubation rate and a tendency to reduce mortality. The inspiratory help may be particularly useful in those patients with fatigue and hypercapnia. However, this hypothetical advantage over CPAP has not been demonstrated in comparative trials. The ventilator is usually set at 5 cmH2O of EPAP and inspiratory pressure between 12 and 25 cmH2O, although initially, the level of pressure support is lower. It is essential to achieve a good adaptation and synchronicity between the patient and the ventilator, reducing leakage to a minimum. The use of facial masks, high FiO2, and sedation with opiates are complementary maneuvers that may be recommended in this context in the majority of patients.

Keywords

Acute heart failure Non-invasive ventilation CPAP Non-invasive pressure support ventilation Acute pulmonary edema 

References

  1. 1.
    Hillberg RE, Johnson DC (1997) Noninvasive ventilation. N Engl J Med 337:1746–1752PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mehta S, Hill NS (2001) Noninvasive ventilation. State of the art. Am J Resp Crit Care Med 163:540–577PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Liesching T, Kwok H, Hill NS (2003) Acute applications of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation. Chest 124:669–713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Moritz F, Benichou J, Vanheste M et al (2003) Boussignac continuous positive airway pressure device in the emergency care of acute cardiogenic pulmonary oedema: a randomized pilot study. Eur J Emerg Med 10:204–208PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Naughton MT, Rahman MA, Hara K, Floras JS, Bradley TD (1995) Effect of continuous positive airway pressure on intrathoracic and left ventricular transmural pressures in patients with congestive heart failure. Circulation 91:1725–1731PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pinsky MR, Summer WR, Wise RA et al (1983) Augmentation of cardiac function by elevation of intrathoracic pressure. J Appl Physiol 54:950–955PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Masip J, Roque M, Sánchez B et al (2005) Noninvasive ventilation in acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema. Systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA 294:3124–3130PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Masip J, Páez J, Merino M et al (2003) Risk factors for intubation as a guide for non-invasive ventilation in patients with severe acute pulmonary edema. Intensive Care Med 29:1921–1928PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Masip J, Betbesé AJ, Páez J et al (2000) Non-invasive pressure support ventilation versus conventional oxygen therapy in acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema: a randomized study. Lancet 356:2126–2132PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Le Conte Ph, Coutant V, N’Guyen JM, Baron D, Touze MD, Potel G (1999) Prognostic factors in acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema. Am J Emerg Med 17:329–332PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Goldberger JJ, Peled HB, Stroh JA, Cohen MN, Frishman WH (1986) Prognostic factors in acute pulmonary edema. Arch Intern Med 146:489–493PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Girou E, Schortgen F, Delcalux C, Burn-Buisson C, Blod F, Lefort Y, Lemaire F, Brochard L (2000) Association of non-invasive ventilation with nosocomial infection and survival in critical ill patients. JAMA 284:2361–2367PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fedullo AJ, Swinburne AJ, Wahl GW, Bixby K (1991) Acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema treated with mechanical ventilation. Factors determining in-hospital mortality. Chest 99:1120–1226Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Soo Hoo GW, Santiago S, Williams AJ (1994) Nasal mechanical ventilation for hypercapnic respiratory failure in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: determinants of success and failure. Crit Care Med 22:1253–1261PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ambrosino N, Foglio K, Rubini F et al (1995) Non-invasive mechanical ventilation in acute respiratory failure due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: correlates for success. Thorax 50:755–757PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nava S, Carbone G, DiBattista N et al (2003) Noninvasive ventilation in cardiogenic pulmonary edema: a multicenter randomized trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 168:1432–1437PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rusterholtz T, Kempf J, Berton C et al (1999) Noninvasive pressure support ventilation with face mask in patients with acute pulmonary edema. Intensive Care Med 25:21–28PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rodriguez L, Carrillo A, Melgarejo A et al (2005) Predictive factors related to success of non invasive ventilation and mortality in the treatment of acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema. Med Clin (Barc) 124:126–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Peter JV, Moran JL, Phillips-Hughes J, Graham P, Bersten AD (2006) Effect of non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) on mortality in patients with acute cardiogenic pulmonary oedema: a meta-analysis. Lancet 367:1155–1163PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Winck J, Azevedo LF, Costa-Pereira A, Antonelli M, Wyatt JC (2006) Efficacy and safety of non-invasive ventilation in the treatment of acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema–a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care 10:R69 (doi:10.1186/cc4905)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Executive summary of the guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of acute heart failure. (2005) The task force on acute heart failure of the European society of cardiology. Eur Heart J 26:384–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bellone A, Vettorello M, Monari A, Cortellaro F, Coen D (2005) Noninvasive pressure support ventilation vs. continuous positive airway pressure in acute hypercapnic pulmonary edema. Intensive Care Med 31:807–811PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sharon A, Shpirer I, Kaluski E, Moshkovitz Y, Milovanov O, Polak R et al (2000) High-dose intravenous isosorbide-dinitrate is safer and better than Bi-PAP ventilation combined with conventional treatment for severe pulmonary edema. J Am Coll Cardiol 36:832–837PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mehta Mehta S, Jay GD, Woolard RH, Hipona RA, Connolly EM, Cimini DM, Drinkwine JH, Hill NS (1997) Randomized, prospective trial of bilevel versus continuous positive airway pressure in acute pulmonary edema. Crit Care Med 25:620–628PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bellone A, Monari A, Cortellaro F, Vettorello M, Arlati S, Coen D (2004) Myocardial infarction rate in acute pulmonary edema: noninvasive pressure support ventilation versus continuous positive airway pressure. Crit Care Med 32:1860–1865PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ICU Hospital Dos de Maig, Consorci Sanitari IntegralUniversity of BarcelonaBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations