Abstract
Acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema (ACPE) is a common cause of respiratory failure that necessitates endotracheal intubation. In some patients intubation and its attendant complications can be avoided with noninvasive ventilation (NIV). Both continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and NIV have been evaluated in patients with ACPE. Compared to conventional treatment, both CPAP and NIV improve vital signs and physiologic variables, and reduce intubation rate, in patients with ACPE. Both CPAP and NIV appear to be well tolerated and are not associated with any serious adverse events. Initial concern that NIV may be associated with a greater risk of myocardial infarction than CPAP was laid to rest by later studies. Despite a physiologic rationale that NIV should offer greater benefit than CPAP, NIV has not been found to offer any advantages regarding intubation rate or mortality compared with CPAP. We review the randomized controlled trials and summarize the evidence on NIV and CPAP in patients with ACPE.
- acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema
- congestive heart failure
- noninvasive ventilation
- mechanical ventilation
- continuous positive airway pressure
- CPAP
- bi-level positive airway pressure
- BiPAP respiratory failure
Footnotes
- Correspondence: Sangeeta Mehta MD FRCPC, Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, and the Division of Respirology, Department of Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, 600 University Avenue, #18-216, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1X5, Canada. Email: geeta.mehta{at}utoronto.ca.
Sangeeta Mehta MD FRCPC presented a version of this paper at the 42nd RESPIRATORY CARE Journal Conference, “Noninvasive Ventilation in Acute Care: Controversies and Emerging Concepts,” held March 7-9, 2008, in Cancún, México.
- Copyright © 2009 by Daedalus Enterprises Inc.