An exposed/unexposed cohort study assessing the effectiveness, the safety and the survival of patients established on home non-invasive ventilation after 80 years old.
Chronic respiratory failure
Elderly
Home non-invasive ventilation
Journal
Respiratory medicine and research
ISSN: 2590-0412
Titre abrégé: Respir Med Res
Pays: France
ID NLM: 101746324
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2023
Nov 2023
Historique:
received:
23
09
2022
revised:
26
02
2023
accepted:
18
03
2023
pubmed:
11
6
2023
medline:
11
6
2023
entrez:
11
6
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Little is known about the use of long-term non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in the elderly. We aimed to assess if the effectiveness of long-term NIV of patients ≥ 80 years (older) was not greatly inferior to that of patients < 75 years (younger). This retrospective exposed/unexposed cohort study included all patients established on long-term NIV treated at Rouen University Hospital between 2017 and 2019. Follow-up data were collected at the first visit following NIV initiation. The primary outcome was daytime PaCO2 with a non-inferiority margin of 50% of the improvement of PaCO2 for older patients compared to younger patients. We included 55 older patients and 88 younger patients. After adjustment on the baseline PaCO2, the mean daytime PaCO2 was reduced by 0.95 (95% CI: 0.67; 1.23) kPa in older patients compared to1.03 (95% CI: 0.81; 1.24) kPa in younger patients for a ratio of improvements estimated at 0.95/1.03 = 0.93 (95% CI: 0.59; 1.27, one-sided p = 0.007 for non-inferiority to 0.50). Median (interquartile range) daily use was 6 (4; 8.1) hours in older versus 7.3 (5; 8.4) hours in younger patients. No significant differences were seen in the quality of sleep and NIV safety. The 24-months survival was 63.6% in older and 87.2% in younger patients. effectiveness and safety seemed acceptable in older patients, with a life expectancy long enough to expect a mid-term benefit, suggesting that initiation of long-term NIV should not be refused only based on age. Prospective studies are needed.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Little is known about the use of long-term non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in the elderly. We aimed to assess if the effectiveness of long-term NIV of patients ≥ 80 years (older) was not greatly inferior to that of patients < 75 years (younger).
METHODS
METHODS
This retrospective exposed/unexposed cohort study included all patients established on long-term NIV treated at Rouen University Hospital between 2017 and 2019. Follow-up data were collected at the first visit following NIV initiation. The primary outcome was daytime PaCO2 with a non-inferiority margin of 50% of the improvement of PaCO2 for older patients compared to younger patients.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We included 55 older patients and 88 younger patients. After adjustment on the baseline PaCO2, the mean daytime PaCO2 was reduced by 0.95 (95% CI: 0.67; 1.23) kPa in older patients compared to1.03 (95% CI: 0.81; 1.24) kPa in younger patients for a ratio of improvements estimated at 0.95/1.03 = 0.93 (95% CI: 0.59; 1.27, one-sided p = 0.007 for non-inferiority to 0.50). Median (interquartile range) daily use was 6 (4; 8.1) hours in older versus 7.3 (5; 8.4) hours in younger patients. No significant differences were seen in the quality of sleep and NIV safety. The 24-months survival was 63.6% in older and 87.2% in younger patients.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
effectiveness and safety seemed acceptable in older patients, with a life expectancy long enough to expect a mid-term benefit, suggesting that initiation of long-term NIV should not be refused only based on age. Prospective studies are needed.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37302159
pii: S2590-0412(23)00026-0
doi: 10.1016/j.resmer.2023.101014
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
101014Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.