无创正压通气对慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重期合并呼吸衰竭的治疗作用

目的探讨NPPV(无创正压通气)治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)急性加重期合并呼吸衰竭的治疗作用。方法将2002-12～2004-04大连医科大学附属第一医院呼吸内科住院的COPD急性加重期合并急性呼吸衰竭的患者42例随机分为标准治疗组21例(常规抗感染、支气管扩张剂、祛痰药、激素、氧疗、纠正酸碱失衡的治疗)和NPPV治疗组21例(标准治疗的治疗基础上,采用美国伟康公司经鼻(面)罩双水平气道正压BiPAPVERSION型呼吸机进行辅助通气)。观察患者PaO2、PaCO2变化,比较插管率、病死率、住院时间、住院费用。结果治疗2h后,NPPV治疗组和标准治疗组PaO2、PaCO2、呼吸频率均有明显改善,并且NPPV治疗组明显优于标准治疗组(P<0.05)。NPPV治疗组插管率、病死率、住院时间、住院费用较标准治疗组均明显降低(P<0.05)。结论NPPV可加速改善COPD急性加重期合并呼吸衰竭患者的PaO2、PaCO,可明显缩短住院时间及降低住院费用,降低插管率、病死率。     

血清B型钠尿肽、高敏C反应蛋白及红细胞分布宽度与慢性阻塞性肺疾病的相关性研究

目的探讨血清B型钠尿肽(BNP)、高敏C反应蛋白(hs-CRP)及红细胞分布宽度(RWD)水平与慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者病情严重程度的关系。方法选取2016年5月至2017年10月我院收治的急性加重期COPD患者(139例)及同期在我院进行体检的健康志愿者(70例)作为研究对象,将刚入院治疗的急性加重期COPD患者设为急性组,将经过治疗达到稳定期COPD标准后的患者设为稳定组,将健康志愿者设为对照组。检测比较三组研究对象血清BNP、hs-CRP以及RWD水平。将急性加重期COPD患者进行GOLD分级,比较不同GOLD分级患者的BNP、hs-CRP以及RWD水平,并对患者BNP、hs-CRP、RWD水平与GOLD分级的关系进行Spearman相关分析。结果急性加重期、稳定期COPD患者、健康对照者血清BNP、hs-CRP、RDW水平比较差异具有统计学意义(P 0. 05),急性加重期COPD患者的血清BNP、hs-CRP及RDW水平显著高于稳定期患者及健康对照者(P 0. 05),稳定期患者的血清BNP、hs-CRP及RDW水平显著高于健康对照者(P 0. 05)。急性加重期COPD患者随着病情加重,血清BNP、hs-CRP以及RDW水平不断升高,不同GOLD分级患者比较差异具有统计学意义(P 0. 05)。Spearman相关性分析结果显示,急性加重期COPD患者血清BNP、hs-CRP及RDW水平与GOLD分级呈正相关(r=0. 649,P=0. 000; r=0. 433,P=0. 005; r=0. 411,P=0. 007)。结论急性加重期COPD患者血清BNP、hs-CRP以及RDW水平随病情严重程度的加重而升高,联合检测血清BNP、hs-CRPR以及RDW水平对早期诊断和判断COPD患者病情严重程度具有一定的指导意义。     

老年慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者血浆脂联素的水平

目的 分析老年慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者血浆脂联素水平与C反应蛋白(CRP)、空腹血糖(FPG)、胰岛素抵抗(IR)及肥胖指标的关系.方法 选择住院的老年COPD患者60例,按病程分为急性加重期和临床稳定期,在不同时期测定血浆脂联素、CRP、FPG、胰岛素(FINS)、体重指数(BMI)、胰岛素抵抗指数(HOMA-IR).选择同期健康老年人50例作为对照.结果 COPD急性加重期及临床稳定期血浆脂联素均较对照组显著升高(P<0.01),临床稳定期血浆脂联素较急性加重期进一步升高(P<0.01);COPD急性加重期CRP、FPG、FINS、HOMA-IR显著高于临床稳定期及对照组(P<0.01);COPD临床稳定期FINS、HOMA-IR显著高于对照组(P<0.05);急性加重期脂联素与CRP、FPG、FINS、HOMA-IR、BMI均呈显著负相关(P<0.05或P<0.01).结论 老年COPD患者血浆脂联素水平升高并伴一定的胰岛素抵抗,脂联素在COPD稳定期进一步抬高,脂联素与CRP、FPG、IR及肥胖指标存在一定的相关性.     

慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者血清网膜素-1变化及其与脂代谢的关系

目的探讨慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者血清网膜素(Omentin)-1水平的变化及与脂代谢的关系。方法选择纳入符合要求的COPD患者96例,其中COPD急性加重期患者44例(急性加重期组)、COPD稳定期患者52例(稳定期组),另选取经体检健康者50例(对照组)。应用酶联免疫吸附试验(ELISA)检测各组血清Omentin-1和内脂素水平。全自动生化分析仪测定各组血脂水平。Pearson相关分析法处理COPD患者血清Omentin-1水平与血脂水平、内脂素的相关性。结果与对照组比较,稳定期组和急性加重期组患者血清Omentin-1和内脂素水平显著增加(P0.01)。与稳定期组比较,急性加重期组患者血清Omentin-1和内脂素水平增加更明显(P0.01)。与对照组比较,稳定期组和急性加重期组患者总胆固醇(TC)、三酰甘油(TG)、低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-C)水平显著降低,高密度脂蛋白胆固醇(HDL-C)水平明显升高(P0.01)。与稳定期组比较,急性加重期组患者TG、TC、LDL-C水平下降更明显,HDL胆固醇更显著(P0.01)。Pearson相关分析显示:COPD患者血清Omentin-1水平与血脂水平指标TG、TC、LDL及内脂素水平呈显著负相关,与HDL呈显著正相关(P0.01)。结论 COPD患者血清Omentin-1水平明显下降,与血脂水平和内脂素相关,可能是临床评估COPD病情的有用指标之一。     

无创正压通气治疗不同病因所致急性呼吸衰竭的疗效与安全性研究

目的:探讨无创正压通气(NPPV)对不同病因所致急性呼吸衰竭的疗效与安全性及影响疗效的因素。方法:采用回顾性分析方法,选择2010年1月至2015年12月,入住北京安贞医院呼吸与危重症医学科重症监护室(RICU)的所有诊断为急性呼吸衰竭,经常规氧疗后症状无好转或加重并给予NPPV治疗的患者,并按引起呼吸衰竭的病因分为慢性阻塞性肺疾病组(COPD组)和非COPD组。收集患者的一般情况,包括性别、年龄、APACHE II评分、HGB及白蛋白,记录使用NPPV前、1h后、2~4h的心率、呼吸频率及血气分析测值(pH,PaO_2,PaCO_2,SaO_2),比较各组患者的再插管率、病死率、住重症监护室(RICU)时间。结果:研究期间,共有252例各种类型的呼吸衰竭患者入住RICU,符合研究纳入标准的患者123例(48.8%),男性69例,女性54例,平均年龄(71.0±11.6)岁。其中COPD组79例,非COPD组44例。COPD组APACHE II评分(20.9±4.4)和PaCO_2(73.4±14.0)mm Hg(1mm Hg=0.133KPa),显著高于非COPD组[分别为(18.4±4.6)和(65.9±14.0)mm Hg],呼吸频率[(21.1±4.5)次/min、心率(88.1±17.4)次/min低于非COPD组(分别为(24.9±7.6)次/min、(95.6±19.5)次/min,P<0.05],两组间平均动脉压、pH值、PaO_2和Sa O2差异无统计学意义。NPPV治疗1h、2~4h后两组的pH、PaCO_2和PaO_2均显著改善,心率和呼吸频率减慢(P<0.05或P<0.01)。COPD组再插管率为5.1%,住院病死率5.1%,均明显低于非COPD组(分别为15.9%和27.3%)(P<0.05或P<0.01)。COPD组的成功率为89.9%,显著高于其他病因组的72.7%(P<0.05)。两组住RICU时间相近(分别为15d vs.16d,P>0.05)。结论:NPPV选择性用于COPD所致急性呼吸衰竭患者,可显著降低再插管率,改善患者的预后,疗效优于非COPD所致急性呼吸衰竭患者,且并发症产生少,安全性较好。     

2014~2015年度无创正压通气进展

无创正压通气(NPPV)在 COPD 急性加重(AECOPD)、急性心源性肺水肿(ACPE)、多种病因导致呼吸衰竭患者、需撤机患儿和婴幼儿中的应用呈稳步增长,而有创通气(IMV)使用有所下降,在“合适的患者”中应用 NPPV 作为一线治疗可获益,在有指征时,应及早应用。Meta 分析提示,对于 ALI/ARDS 患者,应用 NPPV 可降低气管插管率,对于急诊患者的院前治疗,支持早期应用 NPPV。部分研究结果支持在伴有慢性高碳酸血症的呼吸衰竭患者中应用较高强度的 NPPV 治疗,可降低病死率,能改善总体生存率、运动能力和生活质量评分。     

无创正压通气治疗慢性阻塞性肺病急性加重期呼吸衰竭临床研究

目的评价无刨正压通气（NPPV）治疗慢性阻塞性肺病（COPD）急性加重期呼吸衰竭的价值。方法收集2004年01月至2006年08月住我院重症监护室（ICU）54例COPD急性加重期呼吸衰竭的患者,观察所有患者在常规治疗基础上,进行NPPV治疗后的临床表现、动脉血气的变化。结果1例不能耐受、4例改用有创机械通气,49例患者经NPPV治疗2h后呼吸困难缓解,心率、呼吸频率下降（P〈0．05）,动脉血气指标、氧合指数改善（P〈0．05）。结论NPPV能明显改善COPD急性加重期呼吸衰竭的症状、低氧血症、氧合指数及二氧化碳潴留,说明NPPV治疗有效,耐受件好,并发症少。     

多功能呼吸机无创正压通气治疗COPD呼吸衰竭

目的观察使用多功能呼吸机进行无创正压通气(NIPPV)治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)急性加重期并发呼吸衰竭的临床疗效和副作用。方法用NIPPV治疗COPD急性加重期并发呼吸衰竭患者22例,观察平均住院日,气管插管率和病死率,同未使用NIPPV治疗的20例患者做比较;同时观察治疗组通气前后心率及血气指标变化。结果NIPPV组住院时间明显缩短,气管插管率和住院病死率明显下降,与对照组比较有显著性差异;治疗组通气后24h心率明显下降、血气指标显著改善,与通气前比较有显著性差异。NIPPV组中重度呼吸衰竭的插管率明显高于轻、中度呼吸衰竭的插管率。结论用多功能呼吸机行NIPPV是治疗COPD急性加重期并发呼吸衰竭的有效方法,及早应用能迅速缓解病情,缩短住院时间,降低病死率。     

综合加强护理病房老年慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重期死亡因素分析

目的分析综合加强护理病房(ICU)老年慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)急性加重期死亡因素。方法老年COPD急性加重患者共70例,按照最终是否死亡,分为死亡组和存活组,分析其死亡危险因素。结果死亡组年龄、ICU入住天数、机械通气时间、使用抗菌药物≥3种比率、使用抗菌药物时间、急性肾功能不全或消化道出血发生率显著高于存活组(P0.05)。死亡组动脉氧分压(Pa O_2)、p H和白蛋白水平显著低于存活组,动脉二氧化碳分压(Pa CO_2)显著高于存活组(P0.05)。ICU入住天数、机械通气时间、使用抗菌药物≥3种、使用抗菌药物时间和低白蛋白血症是老年COPD急性加重期死亡的独立危险因素(P0.05)。结论综合ICU入住的老年COPD急性加重期患者应在其抗菌药物使用和机械通气方面加强管理,纠正低蛋白血症,同时控制ICU住院天数。     

无创正压通气治疗心脏术后急性呼吸衰竭的疗效和安全性研究

目的:探讨无创正压通气(NPPV)治疗心脏术后急性呼吸衰竭的疗效和安全性。方法:选择2011年9月至2012年10月,心脏外科术后发生急性呼吸衰竭适合进行NPPV的患者,随机分为无创通气组及常规治疗组。记录生命体征、血气分析测值,比较两组患者的再插管率、气管切开率、呼吸机相关性肺炎(VAP)发生率、病死率、入组后机械通气时间、住重症监护室(ICU)时间和术后住院时间。结果:研究期间,共有急性呼吸衰竭患者113例,符合纳入标准77例,男性48例,女性29例,平均年龄(61.7±11.0)岁,其中冠状动脉搭桥术38例,瓣膜手术20例,瓣膜手术+冠状动脉搭桥术9例,大血管手术7例,其他手术3例。无创通气组(n=39),常规治疗组(n=38)。无创通气组再插管率为12.8%,气管切开率10.2%,VAP发生率0,住院病死率12.8%,均明显低于常规治疗组(分别为84.2%、31.6%、18.4%和26.3%)(P<0.05或P<0.01)。无创通气组入组后机械通气时间和住ICU时间中位数分别为28.0(10.5,43.0)h和4.0(2.0,5.0)d,显著低于常规治疗组的69.5(3.8,248.0)h和5.0(4.0,9.0)d,(P<0.05或P<0.01),两组术后住院时间相近[分别为13.0(10.5,20.0)d和17.0(11.0,28.3)d,P>0.05]。NPPV治疗后2～4h,pH、PaCO2和PaO2均显著改善,心率和呼吸频率减慢(P<0.05或P<0.01),与同时间点常规治疗组水平相近。结论:NPPV选择性用于心脏术后急性呼吸衰竭,可显著降低再插管率,改善患者预后,疗效明显优于常规治疗组。需多中心大样本随机对照研究,以明确NPPV在心脏术后患者中应用的适应证和影响疗效因素。     

The Italian multicentre study on noninvasive ventilation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with chronic ventilatory failure (CVF) are more likely to develop exacerbations, which are an important determinant of health-related quality of life (HRQL). Long-term noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NPPV) has been proposed in addition to long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT) to treat CVF but little information is available on its effects on HRQL and resource consumption. Therefore, the current authors undertook a 2-yr multicentric, prospective, randomised, controlled trial to assess the effect of NPPV+ LTOT on: 1) severity of hypercapnia; 2) use of healthcare resources, and 3) HRQL, in comparison with LTOT alone. One hundred and twenty-two stable hypercapnic COPD patients on LTOT for > or = 6 months were consecutively enrolled. After inclusion and 1-month run-in, 90 patients were randomly assigned to NPPV+LTOT (n=43) or to LTOT alone (n=47). Arterial blood gases, hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, total hospital and ICU length of stay and HRQL were primary outcome measures; survival and drop-out rates, symptoms (dyspnoea and sleep quality) and exercise tolerance were secondary outcome measures. Follow-up was performed at 3-month intervals up to 2 yrs. Lung function, inspiratory muscle function, exercise tolerance and sleep quality score did not change over time in either group. By contrast the carbon dioxide tension in arterial blood on usual oxygen, resting dyspnoea and HRQL, as assessed by the Maugeri Foundation Respiratory Failure Questionnaire, changed differently over time in the two groups in favour of NPPV+LTOT. Hospital admissions were not different between groups during the follow-up. Nevertheless, overall hospital admissions showed a different trend to change in the NPPV+LTOT (decreasing by 45%) as compared with the LTOT group (increasing by 27%) when comparing the follow-up with the follow-back periods. ICU stay decreased over time by 75% and 20% in the NPPV+LTOT and LTOT groups, respectively. Survival was similar. Compared with long-term oxygen therapy alone, the addition of noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation to long-term oxygen therapy in stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with chronic ventilatory failure: 1) slightly decreased the trend to carbon dioxide retention in patients receiving oxygen at home and 2) improved dyspnoea and health-related quality of life. The results of this study show some significant benefits with the use of nocturnal, home noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation in patients with chronic ventilatory failure due to advanced chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients. Further work is required to evaluate the effect of noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation on reducing the frequency and severity of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation.     

Noninvasive mechanical ventilation for post acute care

The increasing use of NPPV in both acute and chronic settings has added to ventilator options in the post acute setting. Some patients start NPPV during their acute presentation and continue use during their post acute stay. Others are difficult to wean from invasive mechanical ventilation, and, if selected carefully, can be extubated and weaned using NPPV. Still others may initiate NPPV in the post acute setting with the anticipation of long-term use. In any care settings, principles of patient selection and management in monitoring practices overlap considerably. Noninvasive ventilation has been shown to reduce morbidity, mortality, and hospital stay in the acute setting for selected patients, and almost certainly prolongs survival for patients with restrictive thoracic disorders in the chronic setting. Although efficacy studies have not been performed in the post acute setting, it is reasonable to anticipate that appropriate use of NPPV will yield similar benefits. Accordingly, clinicians working in the post acute setting must acquire skill and experience in the proper application of NPPV to optimally manage the increasing number of patients treated with NPPV in this expanding arena.     

Noninvasive ventilation for acute respiratory failure: a prospective randomised placebo-controlled trial.

The aim of the present study was to clarify whether the known effects of noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NPPV) in patients with respiratory failure are real or due to placebo effects and whether early application of NPPV in the emergency department leads to rapid improvement of the patients condition and outcome. A prospective randomised placebo-controlled study was conducted in 20 patients with severe acute respiratory failure (ARF) secondary to an acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or acute pulmonary oedema, not improving under conventional medical therapy and on the edge of intubation. Patients received either conventional medical therapy plus two-level NPPV (hi-level NPPV) or conventional medical therapy plus "placebo" NPPV. The main outcome measures involved the need for endotracheal intubation in the bi-level NPPV arm and in the placebo arm after crossing over to active NPPV. Morbidity, length of stay, mortality and the effect of the ventilatory mode on clinical, arterial-blood gas parameters, and the sternocleidomastoid muscles electromyogram (EMG) activity were also measured. The 10 patients in the active NPPV group rapidly improved and none needed intubation. Placebo NPPV resulted in no change in the clinical condition of patients that continued to worsen and the 10 patients were crossed over to active NPPV. Three patients were intubated. No differences in terms of morbidity, length of stay or mortality between the two groups were observed. Active NPPV (but not placebo NPPV) led to a rapid and significant improvement in the clinical parameters, pH and the carbon dioxide tension in arterial blood and to a decrease in respiratory frequency and sternocleidomastoid EMG activity. Early application of bi-level noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation in patients with severe acute respiratory failure, due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and acute pulmonary oedema, leads to a rapid improvement in clinical status and blood gases. Noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation had no placebo effect.     

Acute exacerbations of COPD

Acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD) are a common cause of morbidity and mortality. There is a need for a standardised definition of an exacerbation of COPD. The common aetiological factors are bacterial, viral infection and air pollutants. Exacerbations of COPD may adversely affect the natural history of COPD. Several strategies are available now to prevent or reduce exacerbations of COPD including immunisation against influenza and inhaled corticosteroids in patients with moderate/severe disease. The mainstay of treatment involves increasing bronchodilator therapy, systemic glucocorticoids which have now been shown to have a beneficial effect. The circumstances for the use of antibiotic therapy is now established in patients with increased breathlessness, increased sputum production and/or sputum purulence. In those with respiratory failure, noninvasive ventilation has been shown to reduce intubation rates, shorten lengths of hospitalisation, and improve mortality. Early or immediate supported discharge for selected patients has been shown to be effective in the management of patients with COPD.     

Acute applications of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation

Noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NPPV) has been used increasingly to treat acute respiratory failure (ARF). The best indications for its use are ARF in patients with COPD exacerbations, acute pulmonary edema, and immunocompromised states. For these indications, multiple controlled trials have demonstrated that therapy with NPPV avoids intubation and, in the case of COPD and immunocompromised patients, reduces mortality as well. NPPV is used to treat patients with numerous other forms of ARF, but the evidence is not as strong for its use in those cases, and patients must be selected carefully. The best candidates for NPPV are able to protect their airway, are cooperative, and are otherwise medically stable. Success is optimized when a skilled team applies a well-fitted, comfortable interface. Ventilator settings should be adjusted to reduce respiratory distress while avoiding excessive discomfort, patient-ventilator synchrony should be optimized, and adequate oxygenation should be assured. The appropriate application of NPPV in the acute care setting should lead to improved patient outcomes and more efficient resource utilization.     

Where to perform noninvasive ventilation?

Noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NPPV) has been shown to be a means of reducing the need for endotracheal intubation, which when effective reduces the complication rate and improves outcome. Because paralysis and sedation are not needed and because the patient is not necessarily dependent upon a machine for respiration, ventilation outside the intensive care unit (ICU) is an option. A number of studies have shown that NPPV for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can be effective in the non-ICU environment, though usually in patients with less severe exacerbations. However, there have been no direct comparisons of the application of NPPV in different locations. The likelihood of success of the technique is an important factor in deciding there NPPV should be performed. Ready access to invasive ventilation is important when NPPV is not indicated from the outset or fails after an initial trial. In acute exacerbations of COPD, NPPV is less likely to be successful the more severe the exacerbation, as measured by the severity of acidosis. Good tolerance of NPPV, which translates into an improvement in pH and a fall in respiratory rate, predicts a successful outcome and is a useful way of monitoring progress. NPPV has been shown to be cost effective both in the ICU and when performed on general wards. A dedicated intermediate care unit with particular expertise in noninvasive modes of ventilation may provide the best environment, both in terms of outcome, but also cost effectiveness. The ideal location for noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation will vary from country to country and indeed from hospital to hospital, depending upon local factors. However, the most important factor is that staff be adequately trained in the technique and be available throughout the 24-h period.     

Update: Non-Invasive Positive Pressure Ventilation in Chronic Respiratory Failure Due to COPD

Long-term non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV) has widely been accepted to treat chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure arising from different etiologies. Although the survival benefits provided by long-term NPPV in individuals with restrictive thoracic disorders or stable, slowly-progressing neuromuscular disorders are overwhelming, the benefits provided by long-term NPPV in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remain under question, due to a lack of convincing evidence in the literature. In addition, long-term NPPV reportedly failed in the classic trials to improve important physiological parameters such as arterial blood gases, which might serve as an explanation as to why long-term NPPV has not been shown to substantially impact on survival. However, high intensity NPPV (HI-NPPV) using controlled NPPV with the highest possible inspiratory pressures tolerated by the patient has recently been described as a new and promising approach that is well-tolerated and is also capable of improving important physiological parameters such as arterial blood gases and lung function. This clearly contrasts with the conventional approach of low-intensity NPPV (LI-NPPV) that uses considerably lower inspiratory pressures with assisted forms of NPPV. Importantly, HI-NPPV was very recently shown to be superior to LI-NPPV in terms of improved overnight blood gases, and was also better tolerated than LI-NPPV. Furthermore, HI-NPPV, but not LI-NPPV, improved dyspnea, lung function and disease-specific aspects of health-related quality of life. A recent study showed that long-term treatment with NPPV with increased ventilatory pressures that reduced hypercapnia was associated with significant and sustained improvements in overall mortality. Thus, long-term NPPV seems to offer important benefits in this patient group, but the treatment success might be dependent on effective ventilatory strategies.     

无创正压通气在心脏手术后急性左心衰竭患者的应用

目的:观察无创正压通气(NPPV)治疗心脏手术后,急性左心衰竭患者的临床疗效。方法:分析2012年7月至2013年6月期间,56例非体外冠状动脉旁路移植(OPCABG)术后发生急性左心衰竭的患者的临床资料,其中男性39例,女性17例,年龄48~65岁,平均年龄(57±5)岁。患者被随机分为对照组(28例)及NPPV组(28例),对照组给予常规治疗并辅以高浓度氧气吸入;NPPV组患者常规治疗同时应用无创正压通气治疗。比较两组患者治疗前后心率(HR)、呼吸频率(RR)、血乳酸(Lac)、动脉血气等以及二次气管插管、监护室停留时间等指标的变化。结果:对照组中1例患者因大面积脑梗死死亡,其余患者均存活出院。NPPV组中1例患者因无法耐受无创正压通气转为有创机械通气,1例因治疗失败二次插管;NPPV组患者二次气管插管[(2)vs.(12)例,P=0.001]及监护室停留时间[(4.3±1.1)vs.(7.3±1.5)h,P0.001]明显少于对照组;两组患者治疗后各指标明显好于治疗前,NPPV组改善较对照组更为显著。结论:NPPV可以明显改善OPCABG术后左心衰竭患者的缺氧状况,降低二次气管插管的概率,缩短监护室停留时间。