4.2 Article

Noninvasive Ventilation in Acute Exacerbation of Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis

期刊

INTERNAL MEDICINE
卷 49, 期 15, 页码 1509-1514

出版社

JAPAN SOC INTERNAL MEDICINE
DOI: 10.2169/internalmedicine.49.3222

关键词

ARDS; interstitial lung disease; idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis; ventilation; acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis

资金

  1. Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and Objective The outcome of acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (AE-IPF) is usually very poor, and it has been suggested that mechanical ventilation does not benefit AE-IPF patients. Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) has attracted attention as a means to avoid intubation in acute respiratory failure, including acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). This study describes the outcome of patients with AE-IPF who were treated with NIV. Methods Patients included in the study were those who fulfilled the criteria for AE-IPF during the periods between April 1998 and June 2004 at Tosei General Hospital, and in whom NIV was introduced. Clinical data were obtained retrospectively from patient records. Results This study included 11 patients. The initial NIV settings were continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) mode in 6 patients (mean 10.1 +/- 2.5 cmH(2)O) and Spontaneous/Timed mode in 5 (mean inspiratory positive airway pressure/expiratory positive airway pressure; 15.0 +/- 3.3/10.2 +/- 2.9 cmH(2)O). Five patients avoided intubation and survived more than 3 months after AE-IPF. Six patients who failed NIV died within 3 months. In these 6 patients, 4 required intubation. The other 2 patients, who refused endotrachial intubation, died without intubation. Median survival time and 3-month survivals after acute exacerbation were 30 days, and 45.5%, respectively. Conclusion Considering extremely poor prognosis of AE-IPF, our findings suggest that NIV is a viable option for the respiratory management in AE-IPF, and should be studied in a large, well-controlled trial.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据