ABSTRACT
INTRODUÇÃO: O edema agudo de pulmão cardiogênico (EAPC) representa uma importante causa de insuficiência respiratória aguda podendo ser atenuada com a instalação de ventilação mecânica não-invasiva (VNI). OBJETIVO: Comparar pressão positiva contínua (CPAP) e pressão positiva de dois níveis (BIPAP) na via aérea em pacientes adultos com EAPC, quanto à função pulmonar, ao tempo de permanência, suas complicações e a dispneia através de uma revisão sistemática. METODOLOGIA: Ensaios clínicos controlados e randomizados (ECR), revisados por dois revisores independentes, conforme recomendações PRISMA, nas bases de dados PubMed e Biblioteca Cochrane. Incluídos estudos originais que utilizaram a CPAP e a BIPAP em pacientes com EAPC publicados na língua inglesa. A Escala PEDro foi utilizada para analisar a qualidade metodológica dos estudos e a Cochrane Collaboration para análise de risco de viés. RESULTADOS: Foram incluídos 13 artigos, publicados entre os anos 1997 e 2014. Os níveis de CPAP variaram entre 5 e 20 cmH2O nos estudos, e BIPAP apresentou-se com pressão inspiratória positiva (IPAP) entre 8 e 20 cmH2O e pressão expiratória positiva (PEEP) entre 3 e 10 cmH2O. Os estudos apresentaram CPAP e BIPAP sem diferença estatisticamente significante para a melhora da função pulmonar (FR, PaO2 e PaCO2), tempo de internamento, taxas de mortalidade, entubação e infarto agudo do miocárdio (IAM); mostrando-se como modalidades igualmente eficazes. CONCLUSÃO: CPAP e a BIPAP garantem os mesmos efeitos para melhora da função pulmonar, não mantém relação com a permanência da internação e complicações, e melhoram o quadro de dispneia.
INTRODUCTION: Acute cardiogenic lung edema (EAPC) represents an important cause of acute respiratory failure and can be attenuated with the installation of non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV). OBJECTIVE: To compare the use of continuous positive pressure (CPAP) and two-way positive airway pressure (BIPAP) in adult patients with acute pulmonary edema of pulmonary function, length of stay and complications, and dyspnea through a systematic review METHODOLOGY: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) performed by two independent reviewers, as recommended by the PRISMA platform, in the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases. Original studies using CPAP and BIPAP were used in patients with acute cardiogenic lung edema published in English. The PEDro Scale was used to analyze the methodological quality of the studies and Cochrane Collaboration. RESULTS: We included 13 articles, published between 1997 and 2014. CPAP levels ranged from 5 to 20 cmH2O in the studies, and BIPAP presented positive inspiratory pressure (IPAP) between 8 and 20 cmH2O and positive expiratory pressure (EPAP) between 3 and 10 cmH2O. The studies presented CPAP and BIPAP without statistically significant difference for the improvement of the pulmonary function (FR, PaO2 and PaCO2), permanence of hospitalization, mortality rates, intubation and acute myocardial infarction (AMI); as equally effective modalities. CONCLUSION: CPAP and BIPAP guarantee the same effects to improve pulmonary function, does not maintain relation with the permanence of hospitalization and complications, namely: mortality, intubation and AMI, and improve dyspnea.
Subject(s)
Noninvasive Ventilation , Pulmonary Edema , Heart FailureABSTRACT
Objective To compare the therapeutic effects in respect of ventilatory response and the change of hemodynamics of two modes of mechanical ventilation [ proportional assist ventilation (PAV) vs.Bi-level positive airway pressure ventilation (BiPAP) ] on patients with acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema (ACPE).Methods Thirty-two patients diagnosed as ACPE were recruited from May 2008 to April 2009.After conventional therapy ( cardiotonic,diuretic,vasodilators,oxygen) were ineffective for half an hour,32 patients were randomly divided into three groups:control group ( 12 cases kept conventional treatment without mechanical ventilation),BiPAP group ( 12 cases were treated with BiPAP mode of non-invasive mechanical ventilation plus conventional treatment) and PAV group (8 cases were treated with PAV mode of non-invasive mechanical ventilation along with conventional treatment ).Results PaO2,RR and oxygenation index were improved significantly in three groups after 1 hour treatment ( P ＜ 0.05 ).While PaO2 and oxygenation index in noninvasive ventilation groups were higher than those in control group ( P ＜0.05 ).The time required for amelioration of dyspnea in noninvsaive ventilation groups was shorter than that in control group ( P ＜ 0.05 ).The peak airway pressure and the index of degree of comfort ( VAS score,auxiliary respiratory muscles score) in PAV group were lower than those in BiPAP group (P ＜ 0.05 ).Conclusions Both modes of noninvasive mechanical ventilations could improve the oxygenation and relief of dyspnea in patients with ACPE.PAV and BiPAP had the similar effect in patients with ACPE.The synchronization and comfort in PAV group were better than those in BiPAP group.The PAV mode of noninvasive mechanical ventilation was well accepted by patients with ACPE.
ABSTRACT
O uso da continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) no tratamento do edema agudo de pulmão (EAP) cardiogênico tem sido estudado por alguns autores. Recentemente, a utilização da ventilação não-invasiva com dois níveis de pressão (BiPAP) vem sendo estudada nessa situação clínica; entretanto, os resultados são controversos. Dessa forma, foi realizado, através do MEDLINE, um levantamento dos ensaios clínicos randomizados publicados em língua inglesa que analisaram a utilização do BiPAP em pacientes com EAP cardiogênico, obtendo-se um total de 11 trabalhos. O BiPAP mostrou-se útil no manuseio do EAP, apresentando benefícios similares à CPAP. Nos pacientes hipercápnicos, o BiPAP surge como uma importante estratégia de suporte ventilatório não-invasivo. Porém, faz-se necessário um estudo com grande número de pacientes para esclarecer certas dúvidas ainda persistentes.
The use of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in the treatment of acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema (CPE) has been studied by some authors. Recently, the use of bi-level positive airway pressure (BiPAP) has been studied in this clinical situation, although the results have been controversial. We searched MEDLINE in order to find randomized trials published in English that analyzed the use of BiPAP in patients with CPE. Eleven trials were found. BiPAP was useful in the management of CPE, showing similar benefits to those of CPAP. In hypercapnic patients, BiPAP appears to be an important strategy of noninvasive ventilatory support. However, large trials are necessary to clarify certain doubts that still remain.