SynthesisCritical care (London, England)2006
Efficacy and safety of non-invasive ventilation in the treatment of acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema--a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Critical care (London, England), 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00405314 (Prehospital CPAP Versus Usual Care for Acute Respiratory Failure), which is not on this map. Cited by 48 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Prehospital CPAP Versus Usual Care for Acute Respiratory Failure: a Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
48 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 267 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (CPAP or bilevel NPPV) for cardiogenic pulmonary oedema.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Clinical practice guidelines for the use of noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation and noninvasive continuous positive airway pressure in the acute care setting.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2011Guideline
- CPAP for acute cardiogenic pulmonary oedema from out-of-hospital to cardiac intensive care unit: a randomised multicentre study.Intensive care medicine · 2011Trial
- Non-invasive pressure support ventilation and CPAP in cardiogenic pulmonary edema: a multicenter randomized study in the emergency department.Intensive care medicine · 2011Trial
- Subject-ventilator synchrony during neural versus pneumatically triggered non-invasive helmet ventilation.Intensive care medicine · 2008Trial
- Continuous positive airway pressure vs. proportional assist ventilation for noninvasive ventilation in acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema.Intensive care medicine · 2008Trial
- Effect Modification by Acute Coronary Syndrome Prevalence on Non-Invasive Ventilation Efficacy in Acute Cardiogenic Pulmonary Edema: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Review
- Development and evaluation of an ontology for non-invasive respiratory support in acute care.PloS one · 2026Article
- Non-Invasive Respiratory Support for Acute Cardiogenic Pulmonary Edema in the Acute Care Setting.Current heart failure reports · 2025Review
- Effect of noninvasive ventilation on 6-month mortality in patients with acute cardiogenic pulmonary oedema: a retrospective study dedicated to older persons.Internal and emergency medicine · 2025Observational
- Derivation and validation of a simple prognostic risk score to predict short-term mortality in acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema: the SABIHA score.Clinical and experimental emergency medicine · 2025Article
- A Comparison of Different Guidelines for the Treatment of Acute Heart Failure and Their Extensibility to Emergency Departments: A Critical Reappraisal.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Cardiogenic Pulmonary Edema in Emergency Medicine.Advances in respiratory medicine · 2023Review
- Acute dyspnea in the emergency department: a clinical review.Internal and emergency medicine · 2023Review
- Non-invasive positive pressure ventilation with average volume assured pressure support may benefit patients with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure.Clinical and experimental emergency medicine · 2020Article
- Benefits of High-Flow Nasal Cannula Therapy for Acute Pulmonary Edema in Patients with Heart Failure in the Emergency Department: A Prospective Multi-Center Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Early decongestive therapy versus high-flow nasal cannula for the prevention of adverse clinical events in patients with acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema.Journal of thoracic disease · 2019Article
- Clinical efficacy of high-flow oxygen therapy through nasal cannula in patients with acute heart failure.Journal of thoracic disease · 2019Article
- The comparative effectiveness of noninvasive and invasive ventilation in patients with pneumonia.Journal of critical care · 2018Article
- Indications and practical approach to non-invasive ventilation in acute heart failure.European heart journal · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionContinuous positive airway pressure ventilation (CPAP) and non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV) are accepted treatments in acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema (ACPE). However, it remains unclear whether NPPV is better than CPAP in reducing the need for endotracheal intubation (NETI) rates, mortality and other adverse events. Our aim was to review the evidence about the efficacy and safety of these two methods in ACPE management.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on the effect of CPAP and/or NIPV in the treatment of ACPE, considering the outcomes NETI, mortality and incidence of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We searched six electronic databases up to May 2005 without language restrictions, reviewed references of relevant articles, hand searched conference proceedings and contacted experts.
resultsOf 790 articles identified, 17 were included. In a pooled analysis, 10 studies of CPAP compared to standard medical therapy (SMT) showed a significant 22% absolute risk reduction (ARR) in NETI (95% confidence interval (CI), -34% to -10%) and 13% in mortality (95%CI, -22% to -5%). Six studies of NPPV compared to SMT showed an 18% ARR in NETI (95%CI, -32% to -4%) and 7% in mortality (95%CI, -14% to 0%). Seven studies of NPPV compared to CPAP showed a non-significant 3% ARR in NETI (95%CI, -4% to 9%) and 2% in mortality (95%CI, -6% to 10%). None of these methods increased AMI risk. In a subgroup analysis, NPPV did not lead to better outcomes than CPAP in studies including more hypercapnic patients.
conclusionRobust evidence now supports the use of CPAP and NPPV in ACPE. Both techniques decrease NETI and mortality compared to SMT and none shows increased AMI risk. CPAP should be considered a first line intervention as NPPV did not show a better efficacy, even in patients with more severe conditions, and CPAP is cheaper and easier to implement in clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.