Effectiveness of noninvasive ventilation in COVID‐19 related‐acute respiratory distress syndrome

Introduction During this long COVID‐19 pandemic outbreak, continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) are being widely used to treat patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory failure (ARF). As for now, data on the efficacy of NIV in COVID‐19 acute respirator...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The clinical respiratory journal 2021-07, Vol.15 (7), p.779-787
Hauptverfasser: Menzella, Francesco, Barbieri, Chiara, Fontana, Matteo, Scelfo, Chiara, Castagnetti, Claudia, Ghidoni, Giulia, Ruggiero, Patrizia, Livrieri, Francesco, Piro, Roberto, Ghidorsi, Luca, Montanari, Gloria, Gibellini, Giorgia, Casalini, Eleonora, Falco, Francesco, Catellani, Chiara, Facciolongo, Nicola
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 787
container_issue 7
container_start_page 779
container_title The clinical respiratory journal
container_volume 15
creator Menzella, Francesco
Barbieri, Chiara
Fontana, Matteo
Scelfo, Chiara
Castagnetti, Claudia
Ghidoni, Giulia
Ruggiero, Patrizia
Livrieri, Francesco
Piro, Roberto
Ghidorsi, Luca
Montanari, Gloria
Gibellini, Giorgia
Casalini, Eleonora
Falco, Francesco
Catellani, Chiara
Facciolongo, Nicola
description Introduction During this long COVID‐19 pandemic outbreak, continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) are being widely used to treat patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory failure (ARF). As for now, data on the efficacy of NIV in COVID‐19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are lacking, and for this reason it is extremely important to accurately determine the outcomes of this strategy. This study aimed to evaluate clinical data and outcomes of NIV in patients with COVID‐19 ARDS. Matherials and methods Seventy‐nine consecutive patients with sudden worsening of respiratory failure were evaluated. All patients (71% male) had a confirmed SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and signs, symptoms and radiological findings compatible with COVID‐19 pneumonia and all of them underwent a trial of NIV. Primary outcomes were NIV success and failure defined by intubation and mortality rate. Secondary outcome was the duration of NIV. Results NIV was successful in 38 (48.1%) patients (Table 1). EOT was necessary in 21 patients (26.6%). Death occurred in 20 patients (25.3%). In the group of patients having failed a trial with NIV and then being intubated, compared to those who continued NIV, there was no higher mortality rate. By evaluating the ICU survival outcome of the subgroup of patients intubated after NIV, 57% of the patients were discharged and 43% died. Conclusion Previous studies conducted on patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation showed higher mortality rate than the present study. Our data showed that NIV can avoid intubation in almost half of the patients. Therefore, this data could reassure clinicians who would consider using NIV in COVID‐19 ARDS‐related treatment.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/crj.13361
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_24P</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8251172</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2502203440</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4431-8ce2d3029bf3e1333f101f6cb93df99984c59ece9bbb1b497f437f14af045c733</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kctqGzEUhkVJaByni75AGcgmXTjWbTyjTSE4bi4YAiEJ2QmN5qiVGUuONOPiXR6hz5gniRy7Ji1UG-kcfXycw4_QZ4JPSTpDHWanhLER-YB6pMjpYCTE497uXZIDdBjjDOO8LFj-ER0wVtCypLSH6okxoFu7BAcxZt5kzjvrliqmVpa6rW1Ua73LrMvGNw9X5y_Pv4nIAqQ21KlQumsh1XFhg2p9WGW1jW1Y2-LK1cHP4QjtG9VE-LS9--j---RufDmY3lxcjc-mA805I4NSA60ZpqIyDNI-zBBMzEhXgtVGCFFynQvQIKqqIhUXheGsMIQrg3muC8b66NvGu-iqOdQ6TR9UIxfBzlVYSa-s_PvH2Z_yh1_KkuaEFDQJTraC4J86iK2c26ihaZQD30VJc0wpZpzjhB7_g858F1xaL1E5YyI518KvG0oHH2MAsxuGYLnOTqbs5Ft2if3yfvod-SesBAw3wC_bwOr_Jjm-vd4oXwF5Oqca</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2553398252</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Effectiveness of noninvasive ventilation in COVID‐19 related‐acute respiratory distress syndrome</title><source>Wiley Online Library Open Access</source><creator>Menzella, Francesco ; Barbieri, Chiara ; Fontana, Matteo ; Scelfo, Chiara ; Castagnetti, Claudia ; Ghidoni, Giulia ; Ruggiero, Patrizia ; Livrieri, Francesco ; Piro, Roberto ; Ghidorsi, Luca ; Montanari, Gloria ; Gibellini, Giorgia ; Casalini, Eleonora ; Falco, Francesco ; Catellani, Chiara ; Facciolongo, Nicola</creator><creatorcontrib>Menzella, Francesco ; Barbieri, Chiara ; Fontana, Matteo ; Scelfo, Chiara ; Castagnetti, Claudia ; Ghidoni, Giulia ; Ruggiero, Patrizia ; Livrieri, Francesco ; Piro, Roberto ; Ghidorsi, Luca ; Montanari, Gloria ; Gibellini, Giorgia ; Casalini, Eleonora ; Falco, Francesco ; Catellani, Chiara ; Facciolongo, Nicola</creatorcontrib><description>Introduction During this long COVID‐19 pandemic outbreak, continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) are being widely used to treat patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory failure (ARF). As for now, data on the efficacy of NIV in COVID‐19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are lacking, and for this reason it is extremely important to accurately determine the outcomes of this strategy. This study aimed to evaluate clinical data and outcomes of NIV in patients with COVID‐19 ARDS. Matherials and methods Seventy‐nine consecutive patients with sudden worsening of respiratory failure were evaluated. All patients (71% male) had a confirmed SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and signs, symptoms and radiological findings compatible with COVID‐19 pneumonia and all of them underwent a trial of NIV. Primary outcomes were NIV success and failure defined by intubation and mortality rate. Secondary outcome was the duration of NIV. Results NIV was successful in 38 (48.1%) patients (Table 1). EOT was necessary in 21 patients (26.6%). Death occurred in 20 patients (25.3%). In the group of patients having failed a trial with NIV and then being intubated, compared to those who continued NIV, there was no higher mortality rate. By evaluating the ICU survival outcome of the subgroup of patients intubated after NIV, 57% of the patients were discharged and 43% died. Conclusion Previous studies conducted on patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation showed higher mortality rate than the present study. Our data showed that NIV can avoid intubation in almost half of the patients. Therefore, this data could reassure clinicians who would consider using NIV in COVID‐19 ARDS‐related treatment.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1752-6981</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1752-699X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/crj.13361</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33728822</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>acute respiratory failure ; ARDS ; Continuous positive airway pressure ; COVID-19 ; endotracheal intubation ; Intubation ; Mortality ; noninvasive ventilation ; Original ; Respiratory distress syndrome ; Respiratory failure ; Ventilators</subject><ispartof>The clinical respiratory journal, 2021-07, Vol.15 (7), p.779-787</ispartof><rights>2021 John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd</rights><rights>2021 John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4431-8ce2d3029bf3e1333f101f6cb93df99984c59ece9bbb1b497f437f14af045c733</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4431-8ce2d3029bf3e1333f101f6cb93df99984c59ece9bbb1b497f437f14af045c733</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-3950-5789</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fcrj.13361$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fcrj.13361$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,1417,11562,27924,27925,45574,45575,46052,46476</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111%2Fcrj.13361$$EView_record_in_Wiley-Blackwell$$FView_record_in_$$GWiley-Blackwell</linktorsrc><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33728822$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Menzella, Francesco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barbieri, Chiara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fontana, Matteo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scelfo, Chiara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Castagnetti, Claudia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghidoni, Giulia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ruggiero, Patrizia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Livrieri, Francesco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Piro, Roberto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghidorsi, Luca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Montanari, Gloria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gibellini, Giorgia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Casalini, Eleonora</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Falco, Francesco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Catellani, Chiara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Facciolongo, Nicola</creatorcontrib><title>Effectiveness of noninvasive ventilation in COVID‐19 related‐acute respiratory distress syndrome</title><title>The clinical respiratory journal</title><addtitle>Clin Respir J</addtitle><description>Introduction During this long COVID‐19 pandemic outbreak, continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) are being widely used to treat patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory failure (ARF). As for now, data on the efficacy of NIV in COVID‐19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are lacking, and for this reason it is extremely important to accurately determine the outcomes of this strategy. This study aimed to evaluate clinical data and outcomes of NIV in patients with COVID‐19 ARDS. Matherials and methods Seventy‐nine consecutive patients with sudden worsening of respiratory failure were evaluated. All patients (71% male) had a confirmed SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and signs, symptoms and radiological findings compatible with COVID‐19 pneumonia and all of them underwent a trial of NIV. Primary outcomes were NIV success and failure defined by intubation and mortality rate. Secondary outcome was the duration of NIV. Results NIV was successful in 38 (48.1%) patients (Table 1). EOT was necessary in 21 patients (26.6%). Death occurred in 20 patients (25.3%). In the group of patients having failed a trial with NIV and then being intubated, compared to those who continued NIV, there was no higher mortality rate. By evaluating the ICU survival outcome of the subgroup of patients intubated after NIV, 57% of the patients were discharged and 43% died. Conclusion Previous studies conducted on patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation showed higher mortality rate than the present study. Our data showed that NIV can avoid intubation in almost half of the patients. Therefore, this data could reassure clinicians who would consider using NIV in COVID‐19 ARDS‐related treatment.</description><subject>acute respiratory failure</subject><subject>ARDS</subject><subject>Continuous positive airway pressure</subject><subject>COVID-19</subject><subject>endotracheal intubation</subject><subject>Intubation</subject><subject>Mortality</subject><subject>noninvasive ventilation</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>Respiratory distress syndrome</subject><subject>Respiratory failure</subject><subject>Ventilators</subject><issn>1752-6981</issn><issn>1752-699X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kctqGzEUhkVJaByni75AGcgmXTjWbTyjTSE4bi4YAiEJ2QmN5qiVGUuONOPiXR6hz5gniRy7Ji1UG-kcfXycw4_QZ4JPSTpDHWanhLER-YB6pMjpYCTE497uXZIDdBjjDOO8LFj-ER0wVtCypLSH6okxoFu7BAcxZt5kzjvrliqmVpa6rW1Ua73LrMvGNw9X5y_Pv4nIAqQ21KlQumsh1XFhg2p9WGW1jW1Y2-LK1cHP4QjtG9VE-LS9--j---RufDmY3lxcjc-mA805I4NSA60ZpqIyDNI-zBBMzEhXgtVGCFFynQvQIKqqIhUXheGsMIQrg3muC8b66NvGu-iqOdQ6TR9UIxfBzlVYSa-s_PvH2Z_yh1_KkuaEFDQJTraC4J86iK2c26ihaZQD30VJc0wpZpzjhB7_g858F1xaL1E5YyI518KvG0oHH2MAsxuGYLnOTqbs5Ft2if3yfvod-SesBAw3wC_bwOr_Jjm-vd4oXwF5Oqca</recordid><startdate>202107</startdate><enddate>202107</enddate><creator>Menzella, Francesco</creator><creator>Barbieri, Chiara</creator><creator>Fontana, Matteo</creator><creator>Scelfo, Chiara</creator><creator>Castagnetti, Claudia</creator><creator>Ghidoni, Giulia</creator><creator>Ruggiero, Patrizia</creator><creator>Livrieri, Francesco</creator><creator>Piro, Roberto</creator><creator>Ghidorsi, Luca</creator><creator>Montanari, Gloria</creator><creator>Gibellini, Giorgia</creator><creator>Casalini, Eleonora</creator><creator>Falco, Francesco</creator><creator>Catellani, Chiara</creator><creator>Facciolongo, Nicola</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</general><general>John Wiley and Sons Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3950-5789</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202107</creationdate><title>Effectiveness of noninvasive ventilation in COVID‐19 related‐acute respiratory distress syndrome</title><author>Menzella, Francesco ; Barbieri, Chiara ; Fontana, Matteo ; Scelfo, Chiara ; Castagnetti, Claudia ; Ghidoni, Giulia ; Ruggiero, Patrizia ; Livrieri, Francesco ; Piro, Roberto ; Ghidorsi, Luca ; Montanari, Gloria ; Gibellini, Giorgia ; Casalini, Eleonora ; Falco, Francesco ; Catellani, Chiara ; Facciolongo, Nicola</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4431-8ce2d3029bf3e1333f101f6cb93df99984c59ece9bbb1b497f437f14af045c733</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>acute respiratory failure</topic><topic>ARDS</topic><topic>Continuous positive airway pressure</topic><topic>COVID-19</topic><topic>endotracheal intubation</topic><topic>Intubation</topic><topic>Mortality</topic><topic>noninvasive ventilation</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>Respiratory distress syndrome</topic><topic>Respiratory failure</topic><topic>Ventilators</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Menzella, Francesco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barbieri, Chiara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fontana, Matteo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scelfo, Chiara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Castagnetti, Claudia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghidoni, Giulia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ruggiero, Patrizia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Livrieri, Francesco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Piro, Roberto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghidorsi, Luca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Montanari, Gloria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gibellini, Giorgia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Casalini, Eleonora</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Falco, Francesco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Catellani, Chiara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Facciolongo, Nicola</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>The clinical respiratory journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Menzella, Francesco</au><au>Barbieri, Chiara</au><au>Fontana, Matteo</au><au>Scelfo, Chiara</au><au>Castagnetti, Claudia</au><au>Ghidoni, Giulia</au><au>Ruggiero, Patrizia</au><au>Livrieri, Francesco</au><au>Piro, Roberto</au><au>Ghidorsi, Luca</au><au>Montanari, Gloria</au><au>Gibellini, Giorgia</au><au>Casalini, Eleonora</au><au>Falco, Francesco</au><au>Catellani, Chiara</au><au>Facciolongo, Nicola</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Effectiveness of noninvasive ventilation in COVID‐19 related‐acute respiratory distress syndrome</atitle><jtitle>The clinical respiratory journal</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Respir J</addtitle><date>2021-07</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>779</spage><epage>787</epage><pages>779-787</pages><issn>1752-6981</issn><eissn>1752-699X</eissn><abstract>Introduction During this long COVID‐19 pandemic outbreak, continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) are being widely used to treat patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory failure (ARF). As for now, data on the efficacy of NIV in COVID‐19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are lacking, and for this reason it is extremely important to accurately determine the outcomes of this strategy. This study aimed to evaluate clinical data and outcomes of NIV in patients with COVID‐19 ARDS. Matherials and methods Seventy‐nine consecutive patients with sudden worsening of respiratory failure were evaluated. All patients (71% male) had a confirmed SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and signs, symptoms and radiological findings compatible with COVID‐19 pneumonia and all of them underwent a trial of NIV. Primary outcomes were NIV success and failure defined by intubation and mortality rate. Secondary outcome was the duration of NIV. Results NIV was successful in 38 (48.1%) patients (Table 1). EOT was necessary in 21 patients (26.6%). Death occurred in 20 patients (25.3%). In the group of patients having failed a trial with NIV and then being intubated, compared to those who continued NIV, there was no higher mortality rate. By evaluating the ICU survival outcome of the subgroup of patients intubated after NIV, 57% of the patients were discharged and 43% died. Conclusion Previous studies conducted on patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation showed higher mortality rate than the present study. Our data showed that NIV can avoid intubation in almost half of the patients. Therefore, this data could reassure clinicians who would consider using NIV in COVID‐19 ARDS‐related treatment.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</pub><pmid>33728822</pmid><doi>10.1111/crj.13361</doi><tpages>9</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3950-5789</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext_linktorsrc
identifier ISSN: 1752-6981
ispartof The clinical respiratory journal, 2021-07, Vol.15 (7), p.779-787
issn 1752-6981
1752-699X
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8251172
source Wiley Online Library Open Access
subjects acute respiratory failure
ARDS
Continuous positive airway pressure
COVID-19
endotracheal intubation
Intubation
Mortality
noninvasive ventilation
Original
Respiratory distress syndrome
Respiratory failure
Ventilators
title Effectiveness of noninvasive ventilation in COVID‐19 related‐acute respiratory distress syndrome
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-19T13%3A45%3A29IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_24P&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Effectiveness%20of%20noninvasive%20ventilation%20in%20COVID%E2%80%9019%20related%E2%80%90acute%20respiratory%20distress%20syndrome&rft.jtitle=The%20clinical%20respiratory%20journal&rft.au=Menzella,%20Francesco&rft.date=2021-07&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=779&rft.epage=787&rft.pages=779-787&rft.issn=1752-6981&rft.eissn=1752-699X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/crj.13361&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_24P%3E2502203440%3C/proquest_24P%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2553398252&rft_id=info:pmid/33728822&rfr_iscdi=true