A randomized controlled trial comparing non-invasive ventilation delivered using neurally adjusted ventilator assist (NAVA) or adaptive support ventilation (ASV) in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: No study has compared neurally adjusted ventilator assist (NAVA) with adaptive support ventilation (ASV) during non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in subjects with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial, we compared NAVA-NIV with ASV-NIV for delivering NIV in consecutive subjects with AECOPD. The primary outcome was NIV failure rate (invasive mechanical ventilation). The key secondary outcomes were number of NIV manipulations, asynchrony index, and 90-day mortality. RESULTS: We enrolled 76 subjects (NAVA-NIV, n = 36, ASV-NIV, n = 40; 74% males) with a mean ± SD age of 61.4 ± 8.2 years. We found no difference in NIV failure rates between the two arms (NAVA-NIV vs. ASV-NIV; 8/36 [22.2%] vs. 8/40 [20%]; p = 0.83). The median physician manipulations for NIV were significantly less in the ASV-NIV arm than in the NAVA-NIV arm (2 [0.8-4] vs. 3 [2-5]; p= 0.014) during the initial 24-h. We found no difference in median asynchrony index (NAVA-NIV vs. ASV-NIV, 16.6% vs. 16.4%, p = 0.5) and 90-day mortality (22.2% vs. 17.5%, p = 0.67). CONCLUSION: The use of NAVA-NIV was not superior to ASV-NIV in reducing NIV failure rates in AECOPD. Both NAVA-NIV and ASV-NIV had similar asynchrony index and 90-day mortality. TRIAL REGISTRY www. CLINICALTRIALS gov (NCT04414891).