Non-invasive Ventilation For Acute Exacerbations Research Articles

High flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy versus non-invasive ventilation for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with acute-moderate hypercapnic respiratory failure: a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial

BackgroundAlthough cumulative studies have demonstrated a beneficial effect of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen (HFNC) in acute hypercapnic respiratory failure, randomized trials to compare HFNC with non-invasive ventilation (NIV) as initial treatment in acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) patients with acute-moderate hypercapnic respiratory failure are limited. The aim of this randomized, open label, non-inferiority trial was to compare treatment failure rates between HFNC and NIV in such patients.MethodsPatients diagnosed with AECOPD with a baseline arterial blood gas pH between 7.25 and 7.35 and PaCO2 ≥ 50 mmHg admitted to two intensive care units (ICUs) at a large tertiary academic teaching hospital between March 2018 and December 2022 were randomly assigned to HFNC or NIV. The primary endpoint was the rate of treatment failure, defined as endotracheal intubation or a switch to the other study treatment modality. Secondary endpoints were rates of intubation or treatment change, blood gas values, vital signs at one, 12, and 48 h, 28-day mortality, as well as ICU and hospital lengths of stay.Results225 total patients (113 in the HFNC group and 112 in the NIV group) were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The failure rate of the HFNC group was 25.7%, while the NIV group was 14.3%. The failure rate risk difference between the two groups was 11.38% (95% CI 0.25–21.20, P = 0.033), which was higher than the non-inferiority cut-off of 9%. In the per-protocol analysis, treatment failure occurred in 28 of 110 patients (25.5%) in the HFNC group and 15 of 109 patients (13.8%) in the NIV group (risk difference, 11.69%; 95% CI 0.48–22.60). The intubation rate in the HFNC group was higher than in the NIV group (14.2% vs 5.4%, P = 0.026). The treatment switch rate, ICU and hospital length of stay or 28-day mortality in the HFNC group were not statistically different from the NIV group (all P > 0.05).ConclusionHFNC was not shown to be non-inferior to NIV and resulted in a higher incidence of treatment failure than NIV when used as the initial respiratory support for AECOPD patients with acute-moderate hypercapnic respiratory failure.Trial registration: chictr.org (ChiCTR1800014553). Registered 21 January 2018, http://www.chictr.org.cn

Developing an Evidence-Based Interprofessional Algorithm to Apply Noninvasive Ventilation in Acute Exacerbation of COPD

Developing an Evidence-Based Interprofessional Algorithm to Apply Noninvasive Ventilation in Acute Exacerbation of COPD

Clinical practice of non-invasive ventilation for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BackgroundNon-invasive ventilation (NIV) is an evidence-based treatment for acute respiratory failure in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, suboptimal application of NIV in clinical practice, possibly due to poor guideline adherence, can impact patient outcomes. This study aims to evaluate guideline adherence to NIV for acute COPD exacerbations and explore its impact on mortality.MethodsThis retrospective study was performed in two Dutch medical centers from 2019 to 2021. All patients admitted to the pulmonary ward or intensive care unit with a COPD exacerbation were included. An indication for NIV was considered in the event of a respiratory acidosis.ResultsA total of 1162 admissions (668 unique patients) were included. NIV was started in 154 of the 204 admissions (76%) where NIV was indicated upon admission. Among 78 admissions where patients deteriorated later on, NIV was started in 51 admissions (65%). Considering patients not receiving NIV due to contra-indications or patient refusal, the overall guideline adherence rate was 82%. Common reasons for not starting NIV when indicated included no perceived signs of respiratory distress, opting for comfort care only, and choosing a watchful waiting approach. Better survival was observed in patients who received NIV when indicated compared to those who did not.ConclusionsThe adherence to guidelines regarding NIV initiation is good. Nevertheless, further improving NIV treatment in clinical practice could be achieved through training healthcare professionals to increase awareness and reduce reluctance in utilizing NIV. By addressing these factors, patient outcomes may be further enhanced.

High-Flow Nasal Oxygen versus Noninvasive Ventilation in Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) can be used in stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients, but the effect of HFNC on clinical outcomes in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) is still uncertain. We searched electronic literature databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing HFNC with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in hypercapnic patients with AECOPD. The primary endpoint of this meta-analysis was PaCO2, PaO2, and SpO2. The secondary outcomes were the respiratory rate, mortality, complications, and intubation rate. We included 7 RCTs with a total of 481 patients. There were no significant differences on measures of PaCO2 (MD = -0.42, 95%CI -3.60 to 2.75, Z = 0.26, and P = 0.79), PaO2 (MD = -1.36, 95%CI -4.69 to 1.97, Z = 0.80, and P = 0.42), and SpO2 (MD = -0.78, 95%CI -1.67 to 0.11, Z = 1.72, P = 0.08) between the HFNC group and the NIV group. There was no significant difference in measures of the mortality and intubation rate between the HFNC group (OR = 0.72, 95%CI 0.30 to 1.69, Z = 0.76, and P = 0.44) and the NIV group (OR = 2.38, 95%CI 0.49 to 11.50, Z = 1.08, and P = 0.28), respectively. But the respiratory rate in the HFNC group was lower than that in the NIV group (MD = -1.13, 95%CI -2.13 to -0.14, Z = 2.23, and P = 0.03), and fewer complications were found in the HFNC group (OR = 0.26, 95%CI 0.14 to 0.47, Z = 4.46, and P < 0.00001). NIV was noninferior to HFNC in decreasing PaCO2 and increasing PaO2 and SpO2. Similarly, the mortality and intubation rate was similar among the two groups. The respiratory rate and complications were inferior in the AECOPD group treated with HFNC.

Noninvasive ventilation in acute exacerbation of interstitial lung diseases

Introduction Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) has been recognized as a mean to avoid intubation and to reduce the risk of complications. Aims To study the role of NIV in acute respiratory failure in patients with interstitial lung diseases (ILD). Settings and design This was a prospective study. Patients and methods The present study included 30 mechanically ventilated patients through noninvasive masks subjected basically to informed consent, clinical data collection, laboratory investigations, chest radiograph, and arterial blood gas samples. Results A total of 20 patients were found to be survivors, whereas 10 patients were found to be nonsurvivors. The most common type of ILD in our study was hypersensitivity pneumonitis (53.3% of all patients) with fibrosis, and ground glass opacities were the most common radiological findings on high-resolution computed tomography, and moderate restrictive pattern in pulmonary function tests. Infection was the main cause of exacerbation as evidenced by fever, elevated total leukocytic count, staff neutrophilic count, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate. None of our patients developed complications or intolerance to NIV. Conclusion There was improvement in oxygenation parameters, so NIV could be a valuable option for management of acute type I mild to moderate respiratory failure in patients with ILD.

Early use of non-invasive ventilation for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary diseaseon general respiratory wards

Background- Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary disease (COPD) as defined by Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) is a common preventable and treatable disease, is characterized by persistent airflow limitation that is usually progressive and associated with an enhanced chronic inflammatory response in the airways and the lung to noxious particles or gases. Objectives-To evaluate outcome of NIV in terms ofTime for reversion of pH to normal, Duration of NIV, Hospital stay, Failure of NIV, Mortality and to compare the effect of noninvasive mechanical ventilation (NIV) in severelyacidotic (pH &lt; 7.25) with mildly acidotic (pH 7.25–7.35) patients with acute hypercapnic chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD) Methods-This is a prospective observational study of COPD patients with acute Type 2 respiratory failure initiated on NIV conducted in Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu. The study was conducted in the Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Christian Medical College, Vellore.Assuming the mean as 12h (SD=6h), the sample size is Hence it is decided to sample 25 mild acidosis and 25 severe acidosis cases for this study. In the present study, 53 patients were recruited from April 2017 to June 2018.

Noninvasive ventilation in acute exacerbation of COPD: Homer is close to shore

Noninvasive ventilation in acute exacerbation of COPD: Homer is close to shore

Non-invasive ventilation in acute exacerbation of COPD with mild to moderate type 2 respiratory failure

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is a syndrome of progressive airflow limitation caused by abnormal inflammatory reaction of airway and lung parenchyma. Risk factor for development of COPD is a complex interaction of genetic factors and many environmental exposures, with the cigarette smoking being the most common etiological agent.It is a prospective observational comparative study conducted among patient with mild to moderate type 2 respiratory failure, secondary to acute exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease admitted in chest ward department of Respiratory medicine, Late Shri Lakhi Ram Agrawal Memorial Medical College, Raigarh, Chhattisgarh, India for a period of one year from April 2020- April 2021.A total 60 patients were studied. Out of which, 30 patients in study group for whom non-invasive ventilation support along with conventional treatment was given and remaining 30 patients in comparison group, same treatment was given without non-invasive ventilation support. Both groups had similar demographic, clinical, biochemical profile at the time of admission. Distribution of comorbidities, smoking history were similar as shown below in tables. After application of Non-invasive ventilation along with conventional treatment in study group, the result showed that mean hours of NIV use in study group was 27 hours and mean hours of Oxygen use in comparison group was 98 hours.Use of non-invasive ventilation in acute exacerbation of COPD, with mild to moderate type 2 respiratory failure, reduced tachypnoea, tachycardia, after 4 hours. There were improvement in oxygen saturation after 4 hours, improvement in PH also occurred after 4 hours by 0.04. Non-invasive ventilation gives rest to fatigued inspiratory muscle so work of breathing is reduced. It also restores functional and biochemical changes associated with fatigued muscle so all complication were reduced with use of non- invasive ventilation.

Comparison of Vibrating Mesh and Jet Nebulizers During Noninvasive Ventilation in Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Background: Advances in aerosol technology have improved drug delivery efficiency during noninvasive ventilation (NIV). Clinical evaluation of the efficacy of aerosol therapy during NIV in the treatment of acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is very limited. The aim of our study was to compare the efficacy of bronchodilators administered through a vibrating mesh nebulizer (VMN) and jet nebulizer (JN) during NIV in patients with acute exacerbation of COPD. Methods: Prospective randomized cross-over study included 30 patients treated with NIV for acute exacerbation of COPD in an acute care hospital. Patients were consented and enrolled after stabilization of acute exacerbation (3-5 days after admission). Subjects were randomly assigned into two treatment arms receiving salbutamol (2.5 mg): with VMN (Aerogen Solo) and JN (Sidestream) positioned between the leak port and the nonvented oronasal mask during bilevel ventilation with a single-limb circuit. Measurements (clinical data, pulmonary function tests [PFTs], and arterial blood gases) were performed at baseline, 1, and 2 hours after treatment. Results: All measured PFT parameters significantly increased in both groups, but numerically results were better after inhalation with VMN than with JN: for forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) (mean increase from baseline to 120 minutes-165 ± 64 mL vs. 116 ± 46 mL, p = 0.001) and for forced vital capacity (FVC) (mean increase-394 ± 154 mL vs. 123 ± 57 mL, p < 0.001). There was also a statistically significant reduction in respiratory rate and in Borg dyspnea score after therapy with VMN in comparison with the conventional JN. In both groups, there were improvements in PaCO2, but with VMN these changes were significantly higher. Conclusion: Bronchodilator administration in patients with acute exacerbation of COPD during NIV with VMN resulted in clinically significant improvements in FVC and in Borg dyspnea score. Additional studies required to determine the impact on clinical outcomes.

Nasal high-flow oxygen versus noninvasive ventilation in acute exacerbation of COPD: protocol for a randomised noninferiority clinical trial.

BackgroundNoninvasive ventilation (NIV) is considered as the first-line treatment for acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD) complicated by respiratory acidosis. Recent studies demonstrate a role of nasal high-flow oxygen (NHF) in AECOPD as an alternative treatment in patients intolerant to NIV or with contraindications to it.AimThe study aimed to evaluate whether NHF respiratory support is noninferior compared to NIV in respect to treatment failure, defined as need for intubation or change to alternative treatment group, in patients with AECOPD and mild-to-moderate acute or acute-on-chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure.MethodsWe designed a multicentre, prospective, randomised trial on patients with AECOPD, who have pH<7.35 but >7.25 and PaCO2 >45 mmHg, in whom NIV is indicated as a first-line treatment. According to power analysis, 498 participants will be required for establishing noninferiority of NHF compared to NIV. Patients will be randomly assigned to receive NIV or NHF. Treatment will be adjusted to maintain SpO2 between 88%–92% for both groups. Arterial blood gases, respiratory variables, comfort, dyspnoea score and any pulmonary or extrapulmonary complications will be assessed at baseline, before treatment initiation, and at 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 24, 48 h, then once daily from day 3 to patient discharge, intubation or death.ConclusionGiven the increasing number of studies demonstrating the physiological effects of NHF in COPD patients, we hypothesise that NHF respiratory support will be noninferior to NIV in patients with AECOPD and mild-to-moderate acute or acute on chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure.

Non-invasive ventilation in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Results from an anonymous survey of physicians

Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) is an evidence-based treatment modality for patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure (AHRF). It has been shown to reduce mortality, in-hospital complications, length of stay and is cost effective compared to invasive ventilation. Despite this, data from UK has shown higher mortality and a wide variation in practice in the use of NIV in AHRF. …

PREDICTORS OF NONINVASIVE VENTILATION FAILURE IN PATIENTS WITH COPD EXACERBATIONS IN THE ICU

SESSION TITLE: Identifying Successes and Failures of NIV and Airway Clearance: From COPD to Neuromuscular Disease SESSION TYPE: Original Investigations PRESENTED ON: 10/21/2019 1:30 PM - 2:30 PM PURPOSE: Acute exacerbation of COPD is a major mortality and morbidity. Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) is proven to be effective in majority of patients with acute COPD exacerbation. NIV could be lifesaving but also can delay mechanical ventilation if its efficacy is not assessed in a timely manner. In this study we analyzed predictors that can be associated with failure of NIV in acute exacerbation of COPD in a large tertiary care ICU. In particular, we wondered whether duration of NIV among those who failed may be associated with poorer outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective review of consecutive patients with a primary diagnosis of acute exacerbation of COPD requiring NIV admitted to the Cleveland Clinic Main Campus medical ICU was conducted for the period between 2012 and 2017. Baseline data included demographics, APACHE score, albumin level, blood lactate and blood gas elements. Additional chart review was performed to collect NIV setting parameters on presentation to the ICU. Clinical outcome variables collected included outcome and duration of NIV, duration of invasive mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay, hospital length of stay, and patient survival status. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to determine independent variables associated with clinical outcomes. RESULTS: There were 370 patients who met the inclusion criteria. 53.4% were male. Mean age was 64.7 ± 11.2 years old. Average baseline FEV1 was34 ±17% of predicted. Patients had mean pH of 7.20 ± 0.54 and PaCO2 of 70.3 ± 28.7 on presentation. 323 patients (87.3%) were successfully weaned off NIV. 47 patients (12.7%) failed NIV and required invasive mechanical ventilation. 12 patients (3.2 %)died, 8 in NIV success and 4 in failure groups ,APACHE III score was higher among patients who failed NIV (68.3±18.9 versus 48.8± 15.2, p-value <0.001). In the subset of 47 patients who failed NIV requiring intubation, duration of NIV was 25.0 ± 58.8 hours. Multivariate regression analysis yielded a model consisting of APACHE III score, having had an ABG at baseline and BMI as predictive variables for NIV success. ROC curve revealed c-statistic of 0.815 for the final model; Duration of NIV did not predict clinical outcomes among patients who failed NIV. CONCLUSIONS: NIV is successful in preventing mechanical ventilation in majority of patients with acute respiratory failure due to COPD. Patients with worse clinical status at presentation are more likely to fail noninvasive ventilation and require mechanical ventilation. In the subgroup of patients who failed NIV, duration of NIV prior to intubation was not associated with clinical outcomes. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Clinical outcomes of NIV can be accurately predicted by baseline clinical parameters on presentation. Duration of the trial of NIV was not associated with clinical outcomes in the subgroup of patients who failed NIV. DISCLOSURES: No relevant relationships by Erin Covert, source=Web Response No relevant relationships by Tanya Devnani, source=Web Response No relevant relationships by Abhijit Duggal, source=Web Response No relevant relationships by Katelyn Edwards, source=Web Response No relevant relationships by Andrew Fiore, source=Web Response No relevant relationships by Laith Ghazala, source=Web Response No relevant relationships by Justin Hanks, source=Web Response No relevant relationships by Umur Hatipoglu, source=Web Response

Non-invasive ventilation in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: pressure support versus volume assured pressure support

Non-invasive ventilation in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: pressure support versus volume assured pressure support

Ward-Based Non-Invasive Ventilation in Acute Exacerbations of COPD: A Narrative Review of Current Practice and Outcomes in the UK.

Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) is frequently used as a treatment for acute hypercapnic respiratory failure (AHRF) in hospitalised patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). In the UK, many patients with AHRF secondary to AECOPD are treated with ward-based NIV, rather than being treated in critical care. NIV has been increasingly used as an alternative to invasive ventilation and as a ceiling of treatment in patients with a ‘do not intubate’ order. This narrative review describes the evidence base for ward-based NIV in the context of AECOPD and summarises current practice and clinical outcomes in the UK.

Outcomes and predictors of success of noninvasive ventilation in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BackgroundNoninvasive ventilation is appropriately used as a first-line treatment of acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) in many emergency departments. It has been evaluated in a large number of trials, often with clinically important benefits, but the use of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation remains highly variable across institutions and geographical regions. The aim of the study was first to emphasize the superiority of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in acute hypercapneic respiratory failure in patients with an AECOPD in comparison with conventional therapy alone and second was to identify the predictors of NIV failure in such patients.Patientsand methods A total of 50 patients were randomly allocated into two equal groups: 25 patients subjected to medical and oxygen therapy (group I) and 25 to medical and NIV (group II). All patients were followed until death or discharge.ResultsGroup II had a success rate (for weaning and discharge) of 76%, whereas in group I, it was 20% (odds ratio=0.0789, 95% confidence interval=0.021–0.302 and P<0.001). Hospital stay was significantly longer in group I. Complications were significantly higher in group I. Mortality was significantly higher in group I. Improvement of arterial blood gases, respiratory rate, dyspnea scores and hypercarbic encephalopathy was significantly better in non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) group.ConclusionThe addition of NIPPV to standard therapy confers more benefits in patients with AECOPD, with significant reduction of in-hospital mortality, rate of endotracheal intubation, incidence of complications and length of hospital stay compared with standard therapy alone. On the contrary, failure can be predicted by the presence of more comorbidities, signs of severe exacerbation, high BMI, high baseline blood sugar, rapid respiratory rate at admission, abnormal baseline renal functions, high baseline C-reactive protein, high baseline acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II and BAP 65: B=BUN; A=Altered mental status; P=Pulse rate; 65-age years (BAP 65) scores, severe acidosis before NIV treatment and persistent severe acidosis after 1 h of treatment.

A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial of Noninvasive Ventilation in Acute Exacerbation of Asthma in Children

A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial of Noninvasive Ventilation in Acute Exacerbation of Asthma in Children

Home Mechanical Ventilation: An Overview.

Prevalence studies have shown heterogeneous use of home mechanical ventilation in different conditions, with a marked increase in uptake especially in users of noninvasive ventilation. Although randomized controlled trials have examined noninvasive ventilation in acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, for weaning from invasive ventilation and for postextubation respiratory failure, the evidence base for long-term noninvasive ventilation and comparisons with invasive ventilation are less well developed. The combination of noninvasive ventilation and cough-assist devices has reduced the indications for tracheotomy ventilation in some situations (e.g., Duchenne muscular dystrophy, spinal muscular atrophy, myopathies, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis) and has also prolonged survival. Several excellent overviews have been written on the history of home mechanical ventilation and its evolution from negative pressure to positive pressure techniques, including a systematic review of outcomes. This review, instead, will cover recent trials, trends in the field, outcomes, and safety. Because the greatest growth has been in home noninvasive ventilation, this will be the main focus of this article.

Application Effect and Nursing of Non-Invasive Ventilation in Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstruction Pulmonary Disease Patients

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective:&lt;/strong&gt; To study the application methods, summarize the nursing experience and discuss the clinical effect of non-invasive ventilation in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). &lt;strong&gt;Methods:&lt;/strong&gt; 152 cases of AECOPD patients, who received treatment in our hospital from January 2011 to December 2013, were selected and divided into the experimental group and control group randomly. Patients in control group received conventional treatment, whereas besides conventional treatment, experimental group received non-invasive positive pressure ventilation and relevant nursing management. The changes in arterial blood gas and clinical indicators before and after treatment for both groups were observed. &lt;strong&gt;Results:&lt;/strong&gt; After 7 days treatment, all the results of blood gas analysis were significantly improved (&lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt; &amp;lt; 0.05). For the respiratory status (based on Borg scale), two groups were significantly improved after treatment, however, experimental group shown better than control group (&lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt; &amp;lt; 0.05). The two groups had statistically significant difference (&lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt; &amp;lt; 0.05) in the aspects of prognosis, endotracheal intubation and hospitalization time. As for the death index, there was no significant difference between two groups. No special treatment was needed for adverse reactions, they would be relieved slowly. &lt;strong&gt;Conclusion:&lt;/strong&gt; Non-invasive positive pressure ventilation able to improve the recovery rate and quality of life of patients with acute exacerbation of COPD.&lt;/p&gt;

Application Effect and Nursing of Non-Invasive Ventilation in Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstruction Pulmonary Disease Patients

Objective: To study the application methods, summarize the nursing experience and discuss the clinical effect of non-invasive ventilation in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Methods: 152 cases of AECOPD patients, who received treatment in our hospital from January 2011 to December 2013, were selected and divided into the experimental group and control group randomly. Patients in control group received conventional treatment, whereas besides conventional treatment, experimental group received non-invasive positive pressure ventilation and relevant nursing management. The changes in arterial blood gas and clinical indicators before and after treatment for both groups were observed. Results: After 7 days treatment, all the results of blood gas analysis were significantly improved ( p < 0.05). For the respiratory status (based on Borg scale), two groups were significantly improved after treatment, however, experimental group shown better than control group ( p < 0.05). The two groups had statistically significant difference ( p < 0.05) in the aspects of prognosis, endotracheal intubation and hospitalization time. As for the death index, there was no significant difference between two groups. No special treatment was needed for adverse reactions, they would be relieved slowly. Conclusion: Non-invasive positive pressure ventilation able to improve the recovery rate and quality of life of patients with acute exacerbation of COPD.

Success rate during noninvasive ventilation in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a real-life study? Authors' reply

Success rate during noninvasive ventilation in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a real-life study? Authors' reply