RESUMO
Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) is nowadays increasingly used. The significant decrease in tracheal intubation related complications makes it particularly attractive in patients with moderately acute respiratory failure (ARF) who still have some degree of respiratory autonomy. It has also been used to support patients with chronic respiratory failure. However, final outcomes are variable according to the conditions which determined its application. This Consensus was performed in order to review the evidence supporting the use of positive pressure NIV. The patho-physiological background of NIV and the equipment required technology are described. Available evidence clearly suggests benefits of NIV in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and in cardiogenic pulmonary edema (Recommendation A). When considering ARF in the setting of acute respiratory distress syndrome results are uncertain, unless dealing with immunosupressed patients (Recommendation B). Positive results are also shown in weaning of mechanical ventilation (MV), particularly regarding acute exacerbation of COPD patients (Recommendation A). An improved quality of life in chronic respiratory failure and a longer survival in restrictive disorders has also been shown (Recommendation B) while its benefit in stable COPD patients is still controversial (Recommendation C). NIV should be performed according to pre-established standards. A revision of NIV related complications is performed and the cost-benefit comparison with invasive MV is also considered.
Assuntos
Respiração Artificial/métodos , Insuficiência Respiratória/terapia , Ventiladores Mecânicos , Doença Aguda , Argentina , Doença Crônica , Análise Custo-Benefício , Humanos , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/terapia , Respiração Artificial/efeitos adversos , Respiração Artificial/normas , Insuficiência Respiratória/fisiopatologia , Desmame do Respirador/normas , Ventiladores Mecânicos/normasRESUMO
Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) is nowadays increasingly used. The significant decrease in tracheal intubation related complications makes it particularly attractive in patients with moderately acute respiratory failure (ARF) who still have some degree of respiratory autonomy. It has also been used to support patients with chronic respiratory failure. However, final outcomes are variable according to the conditions which determined its application. This Consensus was performed in order to review the evidence supporting the use of positive pressure NIV. The patho-physiological background of NIV and the equipment required technology are described. Available evidence clearly suggests benefits of NIV in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and in cardiogenic pulmonary edema (Recommendation A). When considering ARF in the setting of acute respiratory distress syndrome results are uncertain, unless dealing with immunosupressed patients (Recommendation B). Positive results are also shown in weaning of mechanical ventilation (MV), particularly regarding acute exacerbation of COPD patients (Recommendation A). An improved quality of life in chronic respiratory failure and a longer survival in restrictive disorders has also been shown (Recommendation B) while its benefit in stable COPD patients is still controversial (Recommendation C). NIV should be performed according to pre-established standards. A revision of NIV related complications is performed and the cost-benefit comparison with invasive MV is also considered.
RESUMO
Paciente de 27 años, HIV+ que ingresa en insuficiencia respiratoria por probable neumonía por Pneumocystis carinii (NPC). Presentaba disnea severa, uso de músculos accesorios y frecuencia respiratoria 44 por minuto. El a/AO(2) era 0.35. Se aplicó BiPAP durante 12 horas. Al retirarla el a/AO(2) era O.42, con alivio de la disnea, disminución de la frecuencia respiratoria (25 por min) y sin uso de músculos accesorios. No se observaron complicaciones. Al momento del alta el a/AO(2) era 0.68. La aplicación de CPAP ha sido comunicada en pacientes con PCP, pero no la BiPAP. Nuestro paciente mostró claras evidencias de mejoría sugiriendo que la BiPAP en PCP es una alternativa útil que debería ser incorporada al manejo de estos pacientes.
Assuntos
Humanos , Adulto , Síndrome da Imunodeficiência Adquirida/complicações , Infecções Oportunistas Relacionadas com a AIDS , Pneumonia por Pneumocystis/terapia , Respiração Artificial , Pneumonia por Pneumocystis/complicações , Respiração/fisiologia , Fatores de TempoRESUMO
Paciente de 27 años, HIV+ que ingresa en insuficiencia respiratoria por probable neumonía por Pneumocystis carinii (NPC). Presentaba disnea severa, uso de músculos accesorios y frecuencia respiratoria 44 por minuto. El a/AO(2) era 0.35. Se aplicó BiPAP durante 12 horas. Al retirarla el a/AO(2) era O.42, con alivio de la disnea, disminución de la frecuencia respiratoria (25 por min) y sin uso de músculos accesorios. No se observaron complicaciones. Al momento del alta el a/AO(2) era 0.68. La aplicación de CPAP ha sido comunicada en pacientes con PCP, pero no la BiPAP. Nuestro paciente mostró claras evidencias de mejoría sugiriendo que la BiPAP en PCP es una alternativa útil que debería ser incorporada al manejo de estos pacientes. (AU)
