Respiratory failure & ventilation
Postoperative prophylactic intermittent noninvasive ventilation versus usual postoperative care for patients at high risk of pulmonary complications: a multicentre randomised trial
Primary resultResult — go to the resultOdds ratio 0.97 95% CI 0.90–1.04Authors' conclusion
Prophylactic NIV did not prevent acute respiratory failure.
Study context
- Population
- Patients at high risk of postoperative pulmonary complications (ARISCAT score ≥45) after elective or semi-urgent surgery253 analysed
- Participants
- 266 patients
- Comparison
- Intermittent prophylactic face-mask noninvasive ventilation (NIV) vs usual postoperative care
- NIVn = 125
- Usual caren = 128reference
- Primary endpoint
- In-hospital acute respiratory failure
- Follow-up
- Within 7 days after surgery
Methodological detailsopen, multicentre, November 2017 to October 2019
- Open
- Multicentre
- November 2017 to October 2019
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
Odds ratio
0.97
95% CI 0.90–1.04
P = 0.54
Events by treatment group
NIV vs Usual care
OR 0.97 (95% CI 0.90–1.04); P = 0.54
Further findings
- Unplanned treatment termination (NIV)
- 58 · events
- Unplanned treatment termination (NIV): linked to NIV discomfort in 36
Safety
- NIV discomfort leading to treatment termination
- 36 · events
Original publication
Postoperative prophylactic intermittent noninvasive ventilation versus usual postoperative care for patients at high risk of pulmonary complications: a multicentre randomised trial. Br J Anaesth. Published 5 January 2022. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →