Table 1 Studies that support NIV in HM patients with ARF

Conti, 1998

Prospective

16

ICU

PO₂ ≤ 60 with FiO₂ ≥ 0.5, RR ≥ 35

N/A

6.6% (1/16)

N/A

31.3% (5/16)

NIV reduced need of IMV

Hilbert, 2001

RCT

52(30 HM)

ICU

lung infiltration, fever, PO₂/FiO₂ < 200, RR > 30

Oxygen/NIV

46%

Severe acidosis, encephalopathy, hemodynamic instability, copious secretions

NIV: 38%, Oxygen: 69%

Early NIV decreased need of intubation and mortality

Piastra, 2004

Prospective

4

ICU

PO₂/FiO₂ < 200, RR > 30

N/A

0

N/A

50% (2/4)

NIV decreased need of IMV in pediatric HM patients

Squadrone, 2010

RCT

40

Ward

lung infiltration, SaO₂ < 90% and RR > 25

Oxygen/NIV

0

N/A

Oxygen: 75%, NIV: 15%

Early NIV reduced need of intubation and ICU admission

Gristina, 2011

Retrospective

1302

ICU

HM with ARF

NIV/IMV

46%

illness severity, acute lung injury / ARDS at admission

NIV success:42%, NIV failure: 77%, IMV: 69%

Recommend NIV as first-line for HM with ARF

Molina, 2012

Prospective

300

ICU

HM patients who needed ventilation support

N/A

60.30%

younger, non-congestive heart failure, bacteremia

NIV: 42.3%; IMV: 72.2%; NIV failure: 79.7%

NIV was preferred for ARF with reversible causes

Belenguer, 2013

Retrospective

41

ICU

HM patients who needed ventilation support

NIV/IMV

40%

N/A

NIV: 37%; IMV: 100%

NIV decreased mortality compared with IMV

Rathi,

2017

Retrospective

1614(899HM)

ICU

PO₂/FiO₂ < 200

N/A

38%

younger, high SOFA, HM, BiPAP, non-Caucasian race

NIV failure: ICU mortality:71.3%, hospital mortality: 79.5%

NIV success was associated with the best outcomes; early or late intubation had the same outcomes

Barreto, 2020

Prospective

82

ICU

PO₂/FiO₂ < 300, RR > 32

Oxygen/NIV/IMV

50.80%

high SOFA and RR, sepsis

NIV:49.2%; IMV:83.3%; Oxygen: 5.9%

NIV was feasible for HM patients though benefit was controversial