ERJ
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Permissions
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Katz-Papatheophilou, E
Right arrow Articles by Neumann, M
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Katz-Papatheophilou, E
Right arrow Articles by Neumann, M
Eur Respir J 2000; 15: 498-504
Copyright © ERS Journals Ltd 2000


Clinical Trial

Effects of biphasic positive airway pressure in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

E Katz-Papatheophilou, W Heindl, H Gelbmann, P Hollaus, and M Neumann

Biphasic positive airway pressure (BiPAP) is a ventilatory mode in which two pressure levels (higher (Phigh) and lower (Plow)) acting as continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) alternate at preset time intervals. BiPAP combines pressure-controlled ventilation with unrestricted spontaneous breathing. BiPAP has not yet been evaluated in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Therefore, the effects of BiPAP (15 cmH2O Phigh and 5 cmH2O Plow) pressure support (PS; 15 cmH2O and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) 5 cmH2O) and CPAP (5 cmH2O) on respiratory mechanics in COPD patients were compared. Twenty-one COPD patients were supported in randomized order with BiPAP, PS and CPAP. Pressure-time product (PTP), work of breathing (WOB), change in oesophageal pressure (deltaPoes), mouth occlusion pressure (P0.1), intrinsic PEEP (PEEPi), tension time index (TTI), respiratory frequency, and tidal volume (VT) were measured. During BiPAP, the COPD patients showed a significantly higher PTP, WOB, deltaPoes, P0.1, TTI and PEEPi than during PS. Comparing the Plow phases of BiPAP and CPAP, the breaths during the Plow phases of BiPAP had a lower VT and a greater WOB and PTP due to a higher PEEPi than on CPAP alone. In conclusion, biphasic positive airway pressure carries the risk of increased work of breathing in spontaneously breathing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients. Pressure support is superior for reducing their respiratory muscle effort.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Anesth. Analg.Home page
H. Heinze, B. Sedemund-Adib, M. Heringlake, U. W. Gosch, H. Gehring, and W. Eichler
The Impact of Different Step Changes of Inspiratory Fraction of Oxygen on Functional Residual Capacity Measurements Using the Oxygen Washout Technique in Ventilated Patients
Anesth. Analg., May 1, 2008; 106(5): 1491 - 1494.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2000 by the European Respiratory Society.