|
|
||||||||
Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password |
|||||||||
* From the Department of Respiratory Medicine (Drs. Antón, Güell, Gómez, Serrano, Castellano, and Sanchis), Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; and the Department of Biostatistics (Mr. Carrasco), School of Medicine, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Correspondence to: Antonio Antón, MD, Department of Respiratory Medicine, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Sant Antoni Maria Claret 167, 08025 Barcelona, Spain; e-mail: panton{at}hsp.santpau.es
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Setting: A respiratory medicine ward of a referral hospital.
Methods and principal results: Initially, we examined 44 episodes of acute respiratory failure in 36 patients with CAFL in whom mechanical ventilation was advisable. In 34 of 44 episodes (77%), NIV was used successfully. Patients in whom NIV succeeded had a lower FEV1 prior to admission, a higher level of consciousness (LC), and significant improvements in PaCO2, pH, and LC after 1 h of NIV. A logistic regression model consisting of baseline FEV1 and PaCO2 values, initial PaCO2, pH, and LC values on admission, and PaCO2 values after 1 h of NIV allowed us to correctly classify > 95% of the 44 episodes in which the outcome was successful. In the second part of the study, we prospectively validated the equation in another 15 consecutive CAFL patients with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure. NIV successfully treated 12 patients (80%), and the model correctly classified 14 patients (93%).
Conclusion: Good LC at the beginning of NIV and improvements in pH, PaCO2, and LC values after 1 h of NIV are associated with successful responses to NIV in COPD patients with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure. Our validated multiple regression model confirms that these variables predict the result of NIV in acute hypercapnic failure in CAFL patients.
Key Words: acute respiratory failure chronic airflow limitation noninvasive ventilation pressure support ventilation
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Our aim was to analyze prospectively the clinical and lung-function variables associated with the success or failure of NIV in the treatment of acute hypercapnic failure in patients with CAFL and to generate and validate a predictive model using multiple regression analysis.
| Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
All patients were treated in a conventional respiratory medicine ward,
where nurses and physicians were trained in NIV techniques. A portable
ventilator (BiPAP; Respironics; Murrysville, PA) was used in the
spontaneous mode. A nose mask (Respironics) was initially used. If air
leaks were excessive, a full-face mask (Respironics) was substituted.
The pressure support level was initially set at 10 cm
H2O and was gradually increased until the
respiratory rate fell to 25 breaths per minute and no excessive leakage
from the mouth was observed. Expiratory pressure was set at 6 cm
H2O. A nasogastric tube was placed if gastric
distension was observed. Arterial oxygen saturation was continuously
monitored. Oxygen was administered through the mask until arterial
oxygen saturation was
90%. The duration of the NIV session was
similar to that used in other studies18
and depended on
the patients tolerance to ventilation. Nighttime sessions were
continuous, provided that patient tolerance permitted. Daytime sessions
lasted from 3 to 12 h with pauses of 3 h to allow
administration of conventional medication, respiratory physiotherapy,
feeding, and general patient care. Clinical signs and arterial blood
gas levels were checked 1, 3, and 24 h after starting NIV. If the
physician in charge detected persistence or worsening of clinical
symptoms and pulmonary function variables, NIV was stopped and the
patient was transferred to the ICU. Weaning from NIV was started when
no clinical signs of respiratory distress were observed during the last
pause. Then, if arterial blood gas levels were stable (pH, > 7.35)
after a 12-h pause, therapy was considered terminated, provided that
the original cause of exacerbation was under control. We considered
treatment with NIV to be successful if clinical and functional
improvement had been achieved, OTI had been avoided, and the patient
could be discharged.
Relationships between the results of NIV and anthropometric, clinical,
and lung-function variables were initially analyzed by a univariate
analysis. The patients were classified as suffering from
CAFL-emphysema, CAFL-chronic bronchitis, bronchiectasis with CAFL, CAFL
post-tuberculosis, and unclassified CAFL, which were diagnosed on the
basis of history, symptoms, physical examination, chest films,
and lung function tests. An arbitrary scoring system to assess the
level of consciousness (LC) was established as follows: 1, normal; 2,
presence of flapping tremor; 3, confusion; and 4, stupor or coma. The
acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE)
II24
score also was calculated for each patient before
NIV. Nominal variables were analyzed by a
2
test. Fishers Exact Test was employed if the number of cases was
below five. For ordinal variables, the Kruskal-Wallis test was used. A
t test was used for continuous variables, and a Mann-Whitney
U test was used if continuous variables did not have a
Gaussian distribution. The level of significance was set at 5%. A
logistic multivariate regression model then was used to analyze the
relationship between significant variables of the univariate study and
to calculate a regression equation. A backward stepwise procedure,
using log-likelihood ratio statistics as a selection criteria with
two-tailed t test and a level of significance set at 0.1
(instead of 0.05 to minimize ß error, thereby using a conservative
criterion for removing variables), was used to construct the final
model. Missing data after 1 h of ventilation (for patients who did
not tolerate NIV) were estimated from the means of the other data.
In the second part of the study, we applied the regression equation to another 15 consecutive patients admitted to our hospital with acute hypercapnic failure due to exacerbation of CAFL for whom the same inclusion criteria were used.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
![]() |
where p = ex, e is the base of natural logarithms, and X = 223.76 - (0.60xDif PaCO2) - (27.48xinitial pH) + (2.16xLC) + (0.13xbaseline PaCO2) - (0.27xinitial PaCO2) - (0.25xbaseline FEV1). Dif PaCO2 was the difference between PaCO2 before NIV and after 1 h of ventilation (initialPaCO2 - PaCO2 1 h NIV), and baseline FEV1 and PaCO2 were the last recorded values under stable conditions prior to admission. To make the calculation of the equation easier, LC was recodified on two levels: 0 for the LC scores of 1 and 2, and 1 for scores 3 and 4. The model correctly classified 95.5% of the initial 34 patients with a sensitivity of 0.97 (range, 0.91 to 1) and a specificity of 0.9 (range, 0.7 to 1) when the cutoff was set at 0.5.
In the 15 patients included in the second part of the study to validate the multiple regression model, treatment with NIV was successful in 12 (80%), and the model correctly classified 14 patients (93%) (Table 3 ).
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In the first part of the study, we evaluated prospectively the clinical and functional respiratory variables related to the efficacy of NIV provided by way of PSV in 44 episodes of acute hypercapnic failure in 34 patients with CAFL. The variables showing the highest correlation with NIV outcome were changes in PaCO2, pH, and LC after 1 h of ventilation. Like other authors,19 20 23 we found that patients with an increase in pH and a decrease in PaCO2 soon after starting treatment with NIV responded successfully to it. The improvement in LC that we observed in successfully treated patients, which probably is attributable to the decrease in PaCO2,5 suggested that continuous monitoring of LC may be useful for assessing response to ventilation. We acknowledge, however, that the integrity of the proposed model might be called into question because change in PaCO2 with NIV was included in the equation, and the worsening of clinical signs of respiratory failure or arterial blood gas measurement also was used as a criterion for stopping ventilation. We therefore designed a test of the model with 15 additional patients. This test confirmed the validity of the model, which is consistent with the fact that discharge to home rather than change in PaCO2 constituted the grounds for ultimate success. Moreover, the variables in the model were not the only bases for stopping NIV and switching to OTI. Thus, some patients were switched merely because of intolerance to NIV regardless of other factors.
As for the screening criteria applied before NIV, we observed lower LC scores (indicating less altered consciousness) prior to ventilation in patients successfully treated with NIV, which is in disagreement with two smaller studies22 25 in which no correlation between initial LC and success of treatment with NIV was found. Ambrosino et al,20 on the other hand, studying a series similar in number of patients to ours, also observed that initial LC scores were lower in patients in whom treatment with NIV was successful. These results support the consensus of the American Respiratory Care Foundation,10 which stresses that altered consciousness should be a relative contraindication for NIV, given that confused patients are likely to adapt poorly to NIV as a result of impaired collaboration.
In our patients who did not respond to NIV, baseline FEV1 was higher, meaning, somewhat surprisingly, that patients with greater airway obstruction may respond better to NIV. In patients with less severe CAFL (higher FEV1) the presence of severe acute respiratory failure may imply greater alteration and workload of respiratory muscles generally. Thus, the presence of previously severe airflow limitation should not be used to rule out the application of this technique. The observation of Soo Hoo et al23 that baseline FEV1 was similar in all patients regardless of outcome may be attributable to either the very small number of patients enrolled in their study or to the use of the volume control mode of NIV, which has been described as less effective and less well tolerated than PSV.29 30 31 32 33 Finally, the nature of the respiratory obstruction seems to be unimportant for the selection of patients for NIV, given that the distribution of types of CAFL was similar in our patients treated successfully and unsuccessfully with NIV. Benhamou et al22 similarly observed no differences in success of treatment with NIV for different patterns of CAFL. Age in our study also was unrelated to outcome, a fact consistent with the observations of other authors,23 25 26 indicating that NIV needs not be denied to older patients. Signs of respiratory infection also were similar in our patients in whom NIV succeeded and failed, as in previous studies.19 22 25 No other initial variable recorded in our study (respiratory rate, APACHE II scores, and arterial blood gas levels) was related to outcome.
Our validated multiple regression model, combining baseline and initial variables with their evolution after 1 h of NIV, allowed our model to correctly classify > 95% of patients in the first series with a higher sensitivity and specificity than does the only other model described previously,20 which does not include PaCO2 change after a short session of NIV as a main variable. The second part of our study, the validation of the model by confirming its predictive power in 15 consecutive patients, correctly classified 93% of them. The clinical use of the equation can be complex if appropriate software is not available. However, in order to predict the success of treatment with NIV in CAFL patients with hypercapnic failure, a sound alternative could be to carry out a brief trial (1 h or so) of ventilation with monitoring of LC, PaCO2, and pH.
| Acknowledgements |
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
Received for publication March 10, 1999. Accepted for publication September 30, 1999.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
B Chakrabarti and P M A Calverley Management of acute ventilatory failure. Postgrad. Med. J., July 1, 2006; 82(969): 438 - 445. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Cuvelier, C. Viacroze, J. Benichou, L. C. Molano, M-F. Hellot, D. Benhamou, and J-F. Muir Dependency on mask ventilation after acute respiratory failure in the intermediate care unit Eur. Respir. J., August 1, 2005; 26(2): 289 - 297. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. G. Diaz, A. C. Alcaraz, J. C. P. Talavera, P. J. Perez, A. E. Rodriguez, F. G. Cordoba, and N. S. Hill Noninvasive Positive-Pressure Ventilation To Treat Hypercapnic Coma Secondary to Respiratory Failure Chest, March 1, 2005; 127(3): 952 - 960. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Liesching, H. Kwok, and N. S. Hill Acute Applications of Noninvasive Positive Pressure Ventilation Chest, August 1, 2003; 124(2): 699 - 713. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P K Plant and M W Elliott Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease * 9: Management of ventilatory failure in COPD Thorax, June 1, 2003; 58(6): 537 - 542. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A Anton, R Guell, J Tarrega, and J Sanchis Non-invasive ventilation Thorax, October 1, 2002; 57(10): 919 - 919. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M.W. Elliott, M. Confalonieri, and S. Nava Where to perform noninvasive ventilation? Eur. Respir. J., June 1, 2002; 19(6): 1159 - 1166. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Sinuff, D. Cook, J. Randall, and C. Allen Noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation: a utilization review of use in a teaching hospital Can. Med. Assoc. J., October 1, 2000; 163(8): 969 - 973. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J V J LIGHTOWLER and M W ELLIOTT Predicting the outcome from NIV for acute exacerbations of COPD Thorax, October 1, 2000; 55(10): 815 - 816. [Full Text] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |