View clinical trials related to Cardiogenic Pulmonary Edema.
Filter by:The purpose of this study is to compare non invasive ventilation to high flow nasal cannula oxygen for the management of patients admitted with an acute respiratory failure due to an acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema.
This study objectively held to compare the physiological outcomes in the non-invasive (NIV) treatment of Acute Cardiogenic Pulmonary Oedema (ACPE) patients in the Emergency Department (ED) delivered by Helmet CPAP (hCPAP) and HFNC.Patients will be randomized to receive either hCPAP or HFNC.
Mechanical ventilation, in spite of being a life-saving technique, can also induce lung injury (VILI) mediated by an inflammatory response, thus having a profound impact in the course of critically ill patients. Ventilatory strategies aimed to minimize this VILI have reduced mortality rates. Patients suffering cardiogenic pulmonary edema may need venoarterial extracorporeal oxygenation, at the same time they are being mechanically ventilated. The objective of this study is to analyze changes induced by the use of utraprotective ventilatory strategies in the inflammatory lung response of these patients and their impact on outcomes.
The objective of our study is to evaluate the efficacy of helmet ventilation as compared with Face mask in patients with respiratory failure.
Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) has become now a widely used treatment modality in ICU and emergency services to deal with respiratory failure.1 NIV has the potential to improve ventilatory assistance while avoiding endotracheal intubation and its complications. Since the first publications of Meduri2 and Brochard3 the number of studies on the NIV has been growing and developing and this technique becomes one of the major progress in the field of respiratory assistance. Decompensation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is certainly the least questionable indication of the NIV. However, indication of the NIV is inexorably spreading to other types of acute respiratory insufficiency, including acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema (CPE).4 Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is the most currently used non-invasive ventilation usually performed without the use of a ventilator. NIV using pressure support (NIPSV) combined pressure support (inspiratory aid) and positive expiratory pressure as in CPAP. Based on physiological ground, NIPSV would be more performant than CPAP to improve ventilatory parameters and reduce the work breathing in APE. However, this issue is not settled yet. Number of meta-analysis over the last 2 years were devoted to the comparison of CPAP and NISPV,5 so that the scientific evidence is still far from established. In addition, it is not sur that patients enrolled in these studies are representative of all patients with APE. The fact that they were included solely on the basis of clinical criteria, the risk of overlap with other diagnoses is not negligible. Thus the use of markers of heart failure as the BNP (brain natriuretic peptide) would be very useful. On the other hand, the possible deleterious effect of NIPSV on myocardial perfusion is a problem that has not been definitively resolved. Objectives of the study: 1. Compare the efficacy and safety of the NIPSV with those of CPAP in patients presenting to the emergency department with CPE. 2. Compare the two procedures in subgroups of patients with hypercapnia and high BNP concentration.
In cardiogenic pulmonary edema, Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) added to medical treatment improves outcome. The present study was designed to assess the benefit of CPAP as a first line treatment of cardiogenic pulmonary edema in the out-of-hospital environment.