Table 1 Characteristics of included studies comparing standard medical treatment with supplementary CPAP or NIV
Study | Study Country | Intervention | Study design | Number of patients (N) | Crude mortality rates | Type of patients | Primary outcome | Primary result | Primary review outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
secondary outcome(s) | secondary result(s) | ||||||||
Cheskes et al. [16] | Canada | CPAP | Observational, before-and-after | 214 Interventions | 17/214 | ARF of any cause | Mortality, in-hospital | 7.9% vs. 7.5% (p=0.85) | Mortality: → |
H-LOS: N/R | |||||||||
228 Controls | 17/228 | ||||||||
ICU-LOS: N/R | |||||||||
IR: → | |||||||||
intubation rate | 14.5% vs. 12.7% (p=0.59) | ||||||||
Dib et al. [27] | USA | CPAP | Retrospective, controlled | 149 Interventions | N/R | Presumed ACPE | Prehospital treatment times | 30 vs. 31 min (p > 0.01) | Mortality: N/R |
H-LOS: N/R | |||||||||
ICU-LOS: N/R | |||||||||
IR: ↓ | |||||||||
238 Controls | N/R | clinical variables intubation rate | improvement (p’s <0.01) 2.6% vs. 4.6% (p<0.01) | ||||||
Ducros et al. [30] | France | CPAP | Randomized, controlled multicentre | 107 Interventions | 8/107 | Presumed ACPE | Combined criteria (successful) | Odds ratio 2.1 (1.2-4.0) | Mortality: → |
H-LOS: N/R | |||||||||
ICU-LOS:→ | |||||||||
IR: → | |||||||||
100 Controls | 9/100 | Mortality, 48 hours mortality, in hospital Intensive care unit length-of-stay | odds ratio 1.4 (0.4-5.2) odds ratio 0.9 (0.4-2.5) 2 vs. 2 days (p=0.67) | ||||||
Frontin et al. [28] | France | CPAP | Randomized, controlled | 62 Interventions | 6/60 | Presumed ACPE | Treatment success | Odds ratio 1.19 (0.56-2.53) | Mortality: → |
H-LOS: → | |||||||||
ICU-LOS: → | |||||||||
IR: → | |||||||||
62 Controls | 7/62 | Intubation rate hospital length-of-stay Intensive care unit length-of-stay mortality, 30 days | odds ratio 1,47 (0.23-9.23) 6 vs. 6 days (p=0,5) 8,2 vs. 8 hours (p=0,27) odds ratio 1.14 (0.36-3.65) | ||||||
Gardtman et al. [22] | Sweden | CPAP | Observational, before-and-after | 158 Interventions | 18/158 | Presumed ACPE | ACPE at admission | 76% vs. 93% (p<0.0001) | Mortality: → |
158 Controls | 18/158 | mortality, 1 year | 22% vs. 27% (p=0.64) | H-LOS: → | |||||
ICU-LOS: N/A | |||||||||
IR: N/A | |||||||||
Garuti et al. [25] | Italy | CPAP | Prospective, observational with historical control group | 35 Interventions | 1/35 | ARF of any cause | Mortality, adjusted | Odds ratio 0.06 (0.01-0.53) | Mortality: → |
125 Controls | 30/125 | intubation rate hospital length-of-stay | no intubations 12 vs. 18.8 days (p<0.0001) | H-LOS: ↓ | |||||
ICU-LOS: N/A | |||||||||
IR: → | |||||||||
Hubble et al. [24] | USA | CPAP | Prospective, demographically controlled | 120 Interventions 95 Controls | 5.35% | Presumed ACPE | Intubation rate | Odds ratio 4.04 (1.64-9.95) | Mortality: ↓ |
23.15% | mortality, in hospital hospital length-of-stay | odds ratio 7.48 (1.96-28.54) 5.58 vs. 7.66 days (p=0.755) | H-LOS: → | ||||||
ICU-LOS: N/A | |||||||||
IR: ↓ | |||||||||
Thompson et al. [23] | Canada | CPAP | Randomized, controlled | 35 Interventions | 5/35 | ARF of any cause | Intubation rate | Odds ratio 0.16 (0.04-0.7) | Mortality: ↓ |
34 Controls | 12/34 | mortality, in hospital Intensive care unit length-of-stay hospital length-of-stay | 0.3 (0.09-0.99) 6.5 vs. 3 days 9 vs. 3 days | H-LOS: → | |||||
ICU-LOS: → | |||||||||
IR: ↓ | |||||||||
Craven et al. [29] | USA | NIV | Prospective, demographically controlled | 37 Interventions | 6/37 | Presumed ACPE | Out of hospital treatment time | 31.4 vs. 31.2 min (p=0.931) | Mortality:→ |
25 Controls | 2/24 | improvement in SpO2 hospital length-of-stay mortality, in-hospital | 13.71% vs. 6.99% (p=0.037) 6.34 vs. 7.63 (p=0.48) 6/37 vs. 2/24 (p=0.462) | H-LOS: → | |||||
ICU-LOS: N/R | |||||||||
IR: → | |||||||||
Roessler et al. [20] | Germany | NIV | Randomized, controlled | 25 Interventions | 1/24 | ARF of any cause | Efficiency of treatment | 100% vs. 80% (p=0.05) | Mortality: → |
26 Controls | 2/25 | survival, 28 days intensive care unit length-of-stay hospital length-of-stay intubation rate | 96% vs. 92% (p=1.0) 13.9 vs. 17.4 days (p=0,5) 1.3 vs. 3.7 days (p=0.03) 1 vs. 6 (p=0.66) | H-LOS: → | |||||
ICU-LOS: ↓ | |||||||||
IR: → | |||||||||
Schmidbauer et al. [21] | Germany | NIV | Randomized, controlled | 18 Interventions | 0/18 | Presumed COPD | Dyspnea score | Improvement (p<0.001) | Mortality: - |
18 Controls | 0/18 | respiration rate other clinical variables Intensive care unit length-of-stay | improvement (p=0.001) No diff in other clinical variables 59 vs. 185 (p=0.02) | H-LOS: → | |||||
ICU-LOS: ↓ | |||||||||
IR: → | |||||||||
Weitz et al. [26] | Germany | NIV | Randomized, controlled | 10 Interventions | 1/10 | Presumed ACPE | SpO2 at hospital admission | 97.3% vs. 89.5% (p=0.002) | Mortality: → |
13 Controls | 1/13 | clinical variables Intensive care unit length-of-stay hospital length-of-stay | No diff clinical variables 1.7 “0.5 vs. 2.3 “0.6 days 8.2 “2.3 vs. 12.5 “1.8 days | H-LOS: → | |||||
ICU-LOS: → | |||||||||
IR: N/A |