SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2017
Non-invasive ventilation for the management of acute hypercapnic respiratory failure due to exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 205 papers, 18 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.
Efficacy of Morphine in Reducing the Rate of Early Non-Invasive Ventilation (NIV) Failure in Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), Phase I/IIa
Predictive Value of Diaphragmatic Excursion by Echographic Assessment at the Bedside on Need for Endotracheal Intubation in COPD Patients With Acute Dyspnea in Emergency Medicine
Epidemiology of Non- Invasive Mechanical Ventilation in Argentina: a Multicenter Observational Study
Who cites it
205 citing papers in PubMed, 18 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 403 citations in OpenAlex.
- High-Flow Nasal Cannula Versus Noninvasive Ventilation in the Treatment of Hypercapnic Respiratory Failure: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of evidence-based medicine · 2026Pooled it
- The safety and efficacy of nocturnal noninvasive positive pressure ventilation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Efficacy of non-invasive ventilation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease management: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of clinical outcomes between high-flow nasal cannula and non-invasive ventilation in acute exacerbation of COPD: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2025Pooled it
- A Meta-Analysis on the Efficacy of Noninvasive Positive Pressure Ventilation Combined With Pressure Support Ventilation in Treating Chronic Heart Failure.Clinical cardiology · 2025Pooled it
- Non-invasive positive pressure ventilation for acute asthma in children.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- The effect of telemedicine employing telemonitoring instruments on readmissions of patients with heart failure and/or COPD: a systematic review.Frontiers in digital health · 2024Pooled it
- High-Flow Nasal Oxygen versus Noninvasive Ventilation in Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Canadian respiratory journal · 2023Pooled it
- [Oxygen in the acute care of adults : Short version of the German S3 guideline].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2022Guideline
- High-Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen Therapy versus Non-Invasive Ventilation for AECOPD Patients After Extubation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2022Pooled it
- Efficacy of non-invasive and invasive respiratory management strategies in adult patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Critical care (London, England) · 2021Pooled it
- Chronic non-invasive ventilation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Non-invasive oxygenation strategies for respiratory failure with COVID-19: A concise narrative review of literature in pre and mid-COVID-19 era.Anaesthesia, critical care & pain medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Multivariate meta-analysis of critical care meta-analyses: a meta-epidemiological study.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Pooled it
- High flow nasal oxygen for acute type two respiratory failure: a systematic review.F1000Research · 2021Pooled it
- Long-Term Noninvasive Ventilation in Chronic Stable Hypercapnic Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. An Official American Thoracic Society Clinical Practice Guideline.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2020Guideline
- Non-invasive ventilation as a strategy for weaning from invasive mechanical ventilation: a systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis.Intensive care medicine · 2018Pooled it
- Industry-funded versus non-profit-funded critical care research: a meta-epidemiological overview.Intensive care medicine · 2018Pooled it
- Comparison of positive expiratory pressure device versus non-invasive ventilation on outcomes in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the emergency department.BMC emergency medicine · 2025Trial
- High-velocity nasal insufflation versus noninvasive positive pressure ventilation for moderate acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the emergency department: A randomized clinical trial.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2025Trial
145 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNon-invasive ventilation (NIV) with bi-level positive airway pressure (BiPAP) is commonly used to treat patients admitted to hospital with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure (AHRF) secondary to an acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD).
objectivesTo compare the efficacy of NIV applied in conjunction with usual care versus usual care involving no mechanical ventilation alone in adults with AHRF due to AECOPD. The aim of this review is to update the evidence base with the goals of supporting clinical practice and providing recommendations for future evaluation and research. SEARCH
methodsWe identified trials from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials (CAGR), which is derived from systematic searches of bibliographic databases including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), and PsycINFO, and through handsearching of respiratory journals and meeting abstracts. This update to the original review incorporates the results of database searches up to January 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials that compared usual care plus NIV (BiPAP) versus usual care alone in an acute hospital setting for patients with AECOPD due to AHRF were eligible for inclusion. AHRF was defined by a mean admission pH < 7.35 and mean partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently applied the selection criteria to determine study eligibility, performed data extraction, and determined risk of bias in accordance with Cochrane guidelines. Review authors undertook meta-analysis for data that were both clinically and statistically homogenous, and analysed data as both one overall pooled sample and according to two predefined subgroups related to exacerbation severity (admission pH between 7.35 and 7.30 vs below 7.30) and NIV treatment setting (intensive care unit-based vs ward-based). We reported results for mortality, need for endotracheal intubation, and hospital length of stay in a 'Summary of findings' table and rated their quality in accordance with GRADE criteria. MAIN
resultsWe included in the review 17 randomised controlled trials involving 1264 participants. Available data indicate that mean age at recruitment was 66.8 years (range 57.7 to 70.5 years) and that most participants (65%) were male. Most studies (12/17) were at risk of performance bias, and for most (14/17), the risk of detection bias was uncertain. These risks may have affected subjective patient-reported outcome measures (e.g. dyspnoea) and secondary review outcomes, respectively.Use of NIV decreased the risk of mortality by 46% (risk ratio (RR) 0.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 0.76; N = 12 studies; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 12, 95% CI 9 to 23) and decreased the risk of needing endotracheal intubation by 65% (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.46; N = 17 studies; NNTB 5, 95% CI 5 to 6). We graded both outcomes as 'moderate' quality owing to uncertainty regarding risk of bias for several studies. Inspection of the funnel plot related to need for endotracheal intubation raised the possibility of some publication bias pertaining to this outcome. NIV use was also associated with reduced length of hospital stay (mean difference (MD) -3.39 days, 95% CI -5.93 to -0.85; N = 10 studies), reduced incidence of complications (unrelated to NIV) (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.53; N = 2 studies), and improvement in pH (MD 0.05, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.07; N = 8 studies) and in partial pressure of oxygen (PaO AUTHORS'
conclusionsData from good quality randomised controlled trials show that NIV is beneficial as a first-line intervention in conjunction with usual care for reducing the likelihood of mortality and endotracheal intubation in patients admitted with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure secondary to an acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The magnitude of benefit for these outcomes appears similar for patients with acidosis of a mild (pH 7.30 to 7.35) versus a more severe nature (pH < 7.30), and when NIV is applied within the intensive care unit (ICU) or ward setting.
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.