4.1 Review

Long-term noninvasive ventilation in patients with chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure: assisting the diaphragm, but threatening the heart?

Journal

CURRENT OPINION IN PULMONARY MEDICINE
Volume 22, Issue 2, Pages 130-137

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MCP.0000000000000239

Keywords

cardiac output; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; chronic respiratory failure; hemodynamics

Funding

  1. ERS [LTFR 2014-3126]
  2. Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Santiago, Chile

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose of reviewTo summarize and discuss the available studies on the effects of long-term noninvasive ventilation (NIV) on cardiac function in patients with chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure.Recent findingsA total of nine studies investigated the acute and long-term effects of NIV on cardiac performance in patients with chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure.SummaryBoth the application of expiratory airway pressure and (higher) inspiratory pressures may acutely decrease cardiac output during the initiation of NIV. However, the meaning of this effect in the long term is not clear. Apparently, natriuretic peptides decrease after a certain period of NIV use and heart rate variability seems to improve. Probably, a decreased cardiac output might not be disadvantageous and reflects a decreased work of breathing. Furthermore, the hemodynamic effects of long-term NIV are dependent on the underlying cardiac comorbidities. This is important in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, where cardiac comorbidities are frequent.Considering the available physiological data, future studies should focus on the impact of long-term NIV on heart performance and clinical outcomes. Second, further studies are needed investigating the cardiac long-term effects of different NIV modes, pressures (low and high) and breathing frequencies, especially when underlying cardiac comorbidity is present.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available