BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome is frequently complicated by respiratory failure requiring ventilatory support. We aimed to compare the efficacy of non-invasive ventilation against invasive mechanical ventilation treating respiratory failure in this disease. METHODS: Retrospective analysis was conducted on all respiratory failure patients identified from the Hong Kong Hospital Authority Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Database. Intubation rate, mortality and secondary outcome of a hospital utilizing non-invasive ventilation under standard infection control conditions (NIV Hospital) were compared against 13 hospitals using solely invasive ventilation (IMV Hospitals). Multiple logistic regression analyses with adjustments for confounding variables were performed to test for association between outcomes and hospital groups. RESULTS: Both hospital groups had comparable demographics and clinical profiles, but NIV Hospital (42 patients) had higher lactate dehydrogenase ratio and worse radiographic score on admission and ribavirin-corticosteroid commencement. Compared to IMV Hospitals (451 patients), NIV Hospital had lower adjusted odds ratios for intubation (0.36, 95% CI 0.164 - 0.791, P = 0.011) and death (0.235, 95% CI 0.077 - 0.716, P = 0.011), and improved earlier after pulsed steroid rescue. There were no instances of transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome among health care workers due to the use of non-invasive ventilation. CONCLUSION: Compared to invasive mechanical ventilation, non-invasive ventilation as initial ventilatory support for acute respiratory failure in the presence of severe acute respiratory syndrome appeared to be associated with reduced intubation need and mortality.
BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome is frequently complicated by respiratory failure requiring ventilatory support. We aimed to compare the efficacy of non-invasive ventilation against invasive mechanical ventilation treating respiratory failure in this disease. METHODS: Retrospective analysis was conducted on all respiratory failurepatients identified from the Hong Kong Hospital Authority Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Database. Intubation rate, mortality and secondary outcome of a hospital utilizing non-invasive ventilation under standard infection control conditions (NIV Hospital) were compared against 13 hospitals using solely invasive ventilation (IMV Hospitals). Multiple logistic regression analyses with adjustments for confounding variables were performed to test for association between outcomes and hospital groups. RESULTS: Both hospital groups had comparable demographics and clinical profiles, but NIV Hospital (42 patients) had higher lactate dehydrogenase ratio and worse radiographic score on admission and ribavirin-corticosteroid commencement. Compared to IMV Hospitals (451 patients), NIV Hospital had lower adjusted odds ratios for intubation (0.36, 95% CI 0.164 - 0.791, P = 0.011) and death (0.235, 95% CI 0.077 - 0.716, P = 0.011), and improved earlier after pulsed steroid rescue. There were no instances of transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome among health care workers due to the use of non-invasive ventilation. CONCLUSION: Compared to invasive mechanical ventilation, non-invasive ventilation as initial ventilatory support for acute respiratory failure in the presence of severe acute respiratory syndrome appeared to be associated with reduced intubation need and mortality.
Authors: Basem M Alraddadi; Ismael Qushmaq; Fahad M Al-Hameed; Yasser Mandourah; Ghaleb A Almekhlafi; Jesna Jose; Awad Al-Omari; Ayman Kharaba; Abdullah Almotairi; Kasim Al Khatib; Sarah Shalhoub; Ahmed Abdulmomen; Ahmed Mady; Othman Solaiman; Abdulsalam M Al-Aithan; Rajaa Al-Raddadi; Ahmed Ragab; Hanan H Balkhy; Abdulrahman Al Harthy; Musharaf Sadat; Haytham Tlayjeh; Laura Merson; Frederick G Hayden; Robert A Fowler; Yaseen M Arabi Journal: Influenza Other Respir Viruses Date: 2019-03-18 Impact factor: 4.380
Authors: Holger J Schünemann; Joanne Khabsa; Karla Solo; Assem M Khamis; Romina Brignardello-Petersen; Amena El-Harakeh; Andrea Darzi; Anisa Hajizadeh; Antonio Bognanni; Anna Bak; Ariel Izcovich; Carlos A Cuello-Garcia; Chen Chen; Ewa Borowiack; Fatimah Chamseddine; Finn Schünemann; Gian Paolo Morgano; Giovanna E U Muti-Schünemann; Guang Chen; Hong Zhao; Ignacio Neumann; Jan Brozek; Joel Schmidt; Layal Hneiny; Leila Harrison; Marge Reinap; Mats Junek; Nancy Santesso; Rayane El-Khoury; Rebecca Thomas; Robby Nieuwlaat; Rosa Stalteri; Sally Yaacoub; Tamara Lotfi; Tejan Baldeh; Thomas Piggott; Yuan Zhang; Zahra Saad; Bram Rochwerg; Dan Perri; Eddy Fan; Florian Stehling; Imad Bou Akl; Mark Loeb; Paul Garner; Stephen Aston; Waleed Alhazzani; Wojciech Szczeklik; Derek K Chu; Elie A Akl Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2020-05-22 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Binila Chacko; Lovely Thomas; Roshni Sharma; Bijesh Yadav; Lakshmanan Jeyaseelan; Ashwin O Arul; Punitha Victor; Vignesh K Chandiraseharan; Audrin Lenin; Ronald A B Carey; Jonathan A J Jayakaran; Rajiv K Krishnaswami; John Victor Peter Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Date: 2021-10-13 Impact factor: 11.104
Authors: Philippe Brouqui; Vincenzo Puro; Francesco M Fusco; Barbara Bannister; Stephan Schilling; Per Follin; René Gottschalk; Robert Hemmer; Helena C Maltezou; Kristi Ott; Renaat Peleman; Christian Perronne; Gerard Sheehan; Heli Siikamäki; Peter Skinhoj; Giuseppe Ippolito Journal: Lancet Infect Dis Date: 2009-05 Impact factor: 25.071