Comparison of BPAP S/T and Average Volume-Assured Pressure Support Modes for Hypercapnic Respiratory Failure in the Emergency Department: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Comparison of BPAP S/T and Average Volume-Assured Pressure Support Modes for Hypercapnic Respiratory Failure in the Emergency Department: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: There is limited research into the utility of average volume-assured pressure support (AVAPS), a volume-assured pressurecontrolled mode, especially in patients with hypercapnic respiratory failure. Aims: This study aimed at a randomized comparison of AVAPS and bilevel positive airway pressure spontaneous/timed (BPAP S/T) modes in non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIMV) application with hypercapnic respiratory failure patients in the emergency department (ED). Study Design: Randomized controlled study. Methods: In this prospective randomized controlled study, 80 patients admitted to ED with hypercapnic respiratory failure requiring NIMV were randomly assigned to AVAPS or S/T groups using the sealed envelope method (33 patients in the S/T group, 47 patients in the AVAPS group). Data of arterial blood gas (ABG), vital parameters, Glasgow Coma Score (GCS), additional treatment needs, and clinical outcomes were evaluated, and the treatment success rates of both groups were compared. Results: A total of 80 patients, 33 in the S/T and 47 in the AVAPS group, were analyzed in the study. The pH values improved in the AVAPS group compared to the baseline (0.07 [0.04-0.10] vs 0.03 [0.00-0.11]). PaCO2 (partial pressure of carbon dioxide) excretion was faster in the AVAPS group than in the S/T group in the first hour (10.20 mmHg [6.20-19.20] vs. 4.75 ([-] 0.83-16.88)). The comparison of blood gas measurements showed no significant differences between the groups regarding the changes in PaCO2 and pH values over time (P = .141 and P = .271, respectively). During the ED follow-up, 3 (6.4%) patients in the AVAPS group and 5 (15.2%) patients in the S/T group needed intubation [Relative risk: 0.42 (95% CI: 0.11 to 1.64), P = .21]. Conclusion: In this study, improvements in blood gas parameters in the AVAPS group were faster compared to the S/T group; however, we did not find any significant difference between the groups in terms of clinical parameters. The AVAPS mode is as effective and safe as BPAP S/T in treating patients with hypercapnic respiratory failure in the ED.

___

Balkan Medical Journal-Cover
  • ISSN: 2146-3123
  • Başlangıç: 2015
  • Yayıncı: Erkan Mor
Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler

Clinical Outcomes and Independent Risk Factors for 90-Day Mortality in Critically Ill Patients with Respiratory Failure Infected with SARS-CoV-2: A Multicenter Study in Turkish Intensive Care Units

Neriman Defne ALTINTAŞ, Cenk KIRAKLI, Begüm ERGAN, Sema SARI, Gülseren ELAY, Kürşat GÜNDOĞAN, Recep Civan YÜKSEL, Şahin TEMEL, Murat SUNGUR, Emre KARAKOÇ, Avşar ZERMAN, İsmail Hakkı AKBUDAK, Nuri TUTAR, İrem AKIN ŞEN, Jale Bengi ÇELİK, Jülide ERGİL, Arzu TOPELİ, Esma EREN, Kemal Tolga SARAÇOĞLU, Emr

Early Experience with Salvage Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy in Proton Beam Radiotherapy Failures

Yaşar BOZKURT, Murat ATAR, Louis L. PISTERS

Comparison of BPAP S/T and Average Volume-Assured Pressure Support Modes for Hypercapnic Respiratory Failure in the Emergency Department: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Başak BAYRAM, Emre ŞANCI, Nurfer Zehra GÖREN, Feride Fulya ERCAN COŞKUN, Duygu GÜRSOYLU

Effects of the Rho/Rho-Kinase Pathway on Perfusion Pressure in the Isolated-Perfused Rat Hind Limb Vascular Bed

Nalan TİFTİK, Kansu BÜYÜKAFŞAR, Esra İLHAN, M. Ata SEÇİLMİŞ, Zayed ALZAYED

A Promising, Novel Radiosensitizer Nanodrug Complex for Oral Cavity Cancer: Cetuximab and Cisplatin-Conjugated Gold Nanoparticles

Gizem ÇALIBAŞI KOCAL, Ezgi DAŞKIN, Yasemin BAŞBINAR, Görkem ESKİİZMİR, Kerim YAPICI, Zümre ARICAN ALICIKUŞ, Tarık Buğra ELÇİTEPE, Doğukan AKÇAY, Şeniz İNANÇ SÜRER

New-Onset ANCA-Associated Vasculitis in a Patient with SARS-COV2

Claudia COBILINSCHI, Cristian COBILINSCHI, Alexandra CONSTANTINESCU, Juliana DRANICENAU, Ruxandra IONESCU

Comparison of PD-L1, EGFR, ALK, and ROS1 Status Between Surgical Samples and Cytological Samples in Non-Small Cell Lung Carcinoma

Zübeyde EKİN, Ali VERAL, Deniz NART, Pınar SAVAŞ

Page Kidney: A Rare Cause of Resistant Hypertension Early After Renal Transplantation

Erol DEMİR, Halil YAZICI, Özgür Akın OTO, Ahmet Burak DİRİM

Multiple Publications From the Same Dataset: Is It Acceptable?

Zafer KOÇAK, Servet ALTAY

Genetic and Clinical Characterization of Patients with Maturity-Onset of Diabetes of the Young (MODY): Identification of Novel Variations

Onur ELBASAN, Tuğçe APAYDIN, Esra ARSLAN ATEŞ, Özlem ÜSTAY, Hamza POLAT, Özlem YILDIRIM, Ahmet İlter GÜNEY