Title of article :
High-dose intravenous isosorbide-dinitrate is safer and better than Bi-PAP ventilation combined with conventional treatment for severe pulmonary edema
Author/Authors :
Ahuva Sharon، نويسنده , , Isaac Shpirer، نويسنده , , Edo Kaluski، نويسنده , , Yaron Moshkovitz، نويسنده , , Olga Milovanov، نويسنده , , Roman Polak، نويسنده , , Alex Blatt، نويسنده , , Avi Simovitz، نويسنده , , Ori Shaham، نويسنده , , Zvi Faigenberg، نويسنده , , Michael Metzger، نويسنده , , David Stav، نويسنده , , Robert Yogev، نويسنده , , Ahuva Golik، نويسنده , , Rikardo Krakover، نويسنده , , Zvi Vered، نويسنده , , Gad Cotter، نويسنده ,
Issue Information :
روزنامه با شماره پیاپی سال 2000
Pages :
6
From page :
832
To page :
837
Abstract :
OBJECTIVE To determine the feasibility, safety and efficacy of bilevel positive airway ventilation (BiPAP) in the treatment of severe pulmonary edema compared to high dose nitrate therapy. BACKGROUND Although noninvasive ventilation is increasingly used in the treatment of pulmonary edema, its efficacy has not been compared prospectively with newer treatment modalities. METHODS We enrolled 40 consecutive patients with severe pulmonary edema (oxygen saturation <90% on room air prior to treatment). All patients received oxygen at a rate of 10 liter/min, intravenous (IV) furosemide 80 mg and IV morphine 3 mg. Thereafter patients were randomly allocated to receive 1) repeated boluses of IV isosorbide-dinitrate (ISDN) 4 mg every 4 min (n = 20), and 2) BiPAP ventilation and standard dose nitrate therapy (n = 20). Treatment was administered until oxygen saturation increased above 96% or systolic blood pressure decreased to below 110 mm Hg or by more than 30%. Patients whose conditions deteriorated despite therapy were intubated and mechanically ventilated. All treatment was delivered by mobile intensive care units prior to hospital arrival. RESULTS Patients treated by BiPAP had significantly more adverse events. Two BiPAP treated patients died versus zero in the high dose ISDN group. Sixteen BiPAP treated patients (80%) required intubation and mechanical ventilation compared to four (20%) in the high dose ISDN group (p = 0.0004). Myocardial infarction (MI) occurred in 11 (55%) and 2 (10%) patients, respectively (p = 0.006). The combined primary end point (death, mechanical ventilation or MI) was observed in 17 (85%) versus 5 (25%) patients, respectively (p = 0.0003). After 1 h of treatment, oxygen saturation increased to 96 ± 4% in the high dose ISDN group as compared to 89 ± 7% in the BiPAP group (p = 0.017). Due to the significant deterioration observed in patients enrolled in the BiPAP arm, the study was prematurely terminated by the safety committee. CONCLUSIONS High dose ISDN is safer and better than BiPAP ventilation combined with conventional therapy in patients with severe pulmonary edema.
Keywords :
left ventricular end diastolic pressure , ANOVA , MI , BiPAP , Analysis of variance , myocardial infarction , bilevel positive pressure ventilation , creatine phosphokinase , CK , Continuous positive airway pressure , EPAP , CPAP , expiratory positive airway pressure , IPAP , ISDN , inspiratory positive airway pressure , LVEDP , isosorbide dinitrate
Journal title :
JACC (Journal of the American College of Cardiology)
Serial Year :
2000
Journal title :
JACC (Journal of the American College of Cardiology)
Record number :
596084
Link To Document :
بازگشت