Defining Failure of Noninvasive Ventilation for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Have We Succeeded?

Bruno L Ferreyro,Jose Dianti,Laveena Munshi,Bruno L. Ferreyro
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1513/AnnalsATS.202109-1059ED
2022-02-02
Abstract:The efficacy of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in the management of acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and congestive heart failure is well established (1). Randomized trials have consistently shown the benefits of this intervention on important clinical outcomes such as endotracheal intubation and mortality (1–6). Conversely, the role of NIV in the management of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remains controversial (7). Clinical trials have shown conflicting results, with effects ranging from benefit to harm when this strategy was compared with standard oxygen therapy or high-flow nasal oxygen (8–15). Results from systematic reviews and meta-analyses suggest NIV could have a potential benefit in reducing endotracheal intubation and death in patients with AHRF and ARDS (16). Despite the conflicting data, studies providing real-world data have recently shown that NIV is still used as a first-line therapy in up to 15–40% of cases (17–19).
respiratory system
What problem does this paper attempt to address?