• S Ursella, M Mazzone, G Portale, G Conti, M Antonelli, and N Gentiloni Silveri.
• Department of Emergency Medicine, Catholic University of The Sacred Heart, Policlinico G emelli, Rome, Italy. steura@hotmail.com
• Eur Rev Med Pharmaco. 2007 May 1;11(3):193-205.

AbstractThe patient with acute heart failure may present with acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema (ACPE), a condition accompanied by severe respiratory distress, with crackles over the lung and orthopnea, and an O2 saturation usually < 90% on room air, prior to treatment. Non-invasive ventilation is the delivery of assisted ventilation without the need for endotracheal intubation and an invasive artificial airway. Two techniques are used for ventilatory support: continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and non-invasive positive-pressure ventilation (NPPV). There is a strong consensus that one of these two techniques should be used before endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation because non-invasive techniques dramatically reduce the need for mechanical ventilation via endotracheal intubation and its complications. The aim of this review is to evaluate and resume the evidence for the use of non-invasive positive pressure ventilation in the treatment of acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema according recent literature in order to guide physicians in using CPAP and NPPV in patients affected by ACPE in clinical practice. Recent literature showed that CPAP and NPPV both significantly decrease the need for endotracheal intubation, and CPAP significantly decreases mortality when compared to standard medical treatment. These techniques resulted safe and there is no evidence of increased risk of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) with either of them. Although both CPAP and NPPV present similar efficacy, CPAP has been shown to be cheaper and easier to implement in clinical practice and it could be considered the preferred intervention in patients with ACPE especially in the Emergency Department setting.

12 keywords...

hide…