Abstract
To compare the clinical effect of noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NIPPV), delivered via critical care ventilator or miniventilator, in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). Prospective comparison study. Patients with AECOPD underwent NIPPV via: miniventilator with BiLevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP; Group A); critical care ventilator with pressure support ventilation and positive end expiratory pressure (PSV + PEEP; Group B); critical care ventilator with pressure-synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation (P-SIMV)+PSV + PEEP (Group C). Physiological parameters were recorded before, during and after ventilation. Patients in Group C (n = 21) showed significantly better improvements in physiological parameters (compared with pretreatment values) than those in Group B (n = 20) or Group A (n = 22). NIPPV delivered via critical care ventilator has a better treatment effect than miniventilator NIPPV in patients with AECOPD. The use of P-SIMV + PSV + PEEP mode provides a significantly better treatment effect than PSV + PEEP alone.
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
