Background: It's uncertain if BiPAP helps people with acute respiratory failure.
This research aims to determine if BiPAP is effective for people with acute
respiratory failure. Method: The PRISMA guidelines were adhered to in this
systematic study. Cochrane, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL for papers released
between 1997 and 2024. Only randomized controlled studies comparing the
effectiveness of continuous positive airway pressure with oxygen therapy, NIVVAVA,
or BiPAP ventilation in patients with ARF were included. Mortality,
length of hospital stay, and ETI rates were the main outcomes of interest that
were compared between the two groups in order to evaluate efficacy. Result:
Eight studies totaling 524 people were enrolled in the review; 5 of the studies
utilized CPAP as the control group, one used NIV-VAVA and two of the studies
used oxygen. All of the articles included are randomized controlled trials that
were carried out in the emergency setting or intensive care unit. Except for two
studies where the underlying cause was solid tumor end stage and COPD, the
underlying cause of abrupt respiratory failure in all included trials was
cardiopulmonary edema. In most of the examined publications, the main
outcomes were, mortality, endotracheal intubation and length of hospital stay.
Conclusion: We conclude from our systematic investigation that NIV use in ARF
parents reduce the risk of complications and mortality in cardiopulmonary
edema patients, and that BiPAP beneficial as CPAP.
Keywords: Acute respiratory failure, endotracheal intubation, mortality,
noninvasive ventilation, Bi-level positive airway pressure
