Benefits and risks of success or failure of noninvasive ventilation
Abstract
Objective Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) fails more frequently for de novo acute respiratory failure (de novo) than for cardiogenic pulmonary edema (CPE) or acute-on-chronic respiratory failure (AOC). The impact of NIV failure and success was compared between de novo and CPE or AOC after adjustment for disease severity.Settings Patients requiring ventilatory support were enrolled in a prospective survey in 70 French ICUs. Of 1076 patients requiring ventilatory support, 524 were eligible, including 299 de novo (NIV use, 30%) and 225 CPE-AOC (NIV use, 55%).Design and analysis Independent risk factors associated with mortality and length of stay were identified by logistic regression analysis. The adjusted outcome of NIV success or failure was compared to that with endotracheal intubation without NIV.Results NIV success was independently associated with survival in both de novo, adjusted OR 0.05 (95% CI 0.01-0.42), and CPE-AOC OR 0.03 (CI 0.01-0.24). NIV failure was associated with ICU mortality in the de novo group (OR 3.24, CI 1.61-6.53) but not in the CPE-AOC group. Nosocomial pneumonia was less common in patients successful with NIV. NIV failure was associated with a longer ICU stay in CPE-AOC only. The overall use of NIV was independently associated with a better outcome only in CPE-AOC patients (OR 0.33, CI 0.15-0.73).Conclusion The effect of NIV differs between de novo and CPE-AOC patients because NIV failure is associated with increased mortality for de novo patients. This finding should raise a note of caution when applying NIV in this indication.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Studies have suggested that NIV failure is an independent risk factor for mortality specifically in this population, although careful patient selection may reduce this risk.
“Studies have suggested that NIV failure is an independent risk factor for mortality specifically in this population, although careful patient selection may reduce this risk [415, 416].”
From Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock 2021 (2021) · cites this paper as [416]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 37 · Cited by 337
- Authors
- Demoule, A., Girou, E., Richard, J.-C., Taille, S., & Brochard, L.
- Affiliations
- Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Henri-Mondor (FR)
- Inserm (FR)
- Hôpital Charles-Nicolle (FR)
- Corresponding author
- Brochard, Laurent
- Venue
- Intensive Care Medicine
- Published
- 2006-09-21
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1756-1765
- ISSN
- 0342-4642 (ISSN-L)
- 1432-1238
- OpenAlex
- W2129289400
- Cited by
- 337
- References
- 37
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 16
- FWCI
- 11.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Intensive Care Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Respiratory Support and Mechanisms
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Obstructive Sleep Apnea Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Nosocomial Infections in ICU
- Keywords
- non-invasive ventilation, acute respiratory failure, cardiogenic pulmonary edema, acute-on-chronic respiratory failure, NIV failure, mortality, length of hospital stay, nosocomial pneumonia, endotracheal intubation, risk factors
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Cross Infection, Humans, Intubation, Intratracheal, Length of Stay, Middle Aged, Pneumonia, Prospective Studies, Pulmonary Edema, Respiration, Artificial, Respiratory Insufficiency, Risk, Multivariate Analysis, Logistic Models, Treatment Outcome, Hospital Mortality
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review