The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of NIPPV as a relatively novel intervention in decreasing pulmonary secretions and improving the respiratory function, quality of sleep and nutrition of CF patients in a referral center for respiratory diseases. The study was addressing the following questions:
1. Is NIPPV able to decrease the RR, PCO2 and use of accessory respiratory muscles as the hallmarks of respiratory distress and failure?
2. Does NIPPV increase the SPO2 significantly?
3. Does the use of NIPPV increase the quality of sleep and nutritional status dramatically?
4. Is the airway clearance after NIPPV easier by the way of chest physical therapy?
In the current study, BIPAP option was used for NIPPV and the IPAP and EPAP pressures were adjusted based on patient’s tolerance and titration of VBG, and were in agreement with previous studies (
17). Our results showed that use of NIPPV in CF patients significantly increased SPO
2 (P < 0.05) and caused a significant reduction in PCO
2 and RR of patients (P < 0.05). Also, our results showed that use of NIPPV significantly improved the sleep quality, nutritional status and ease of respiratory clearance by physiotherapy (P < 0.05); although the effect of NIPPV on use of accessory respiratory muscles and the objective volume of secretions was not significant (P > 0.05).
Despite the availability of several studies on the use of NIPPV in different respiratory diseases, no definite consensus has been reached on selection of the mode of machine or inhalation or exhalation pressures in NIPPV (
18). This is also true for use of NIPPV for respiratory failure in children. In a review study by Teague et al. (
17) on the indications for use of NIPPV in pediatric medicine, the agreed values for inspiratory positive airway pressure (IPAP) and expiratory positive airway pressure (EPAP) in CF patients were reported to be 8 - 18 Cm H
2O and 4 - 10 Cm H
2O, respectively. Flight et al in their nine-year study on hospitalized patients with CF, who had received NIPPV, reported that the lowest IPAP pressure was 2.7 Cm H
2O without applying EPAP; in other words, continues positive airway pressure (CPAP) was used (
19). They showed that use of CPAP caused significant improvements in CF patients.
The effect of NIPPV on SPO
2 of CF patients has been evaluated in many previous studies. Kofler et al. reported increased SPO
2 following NIPPV alone compared to the group receiving respiratory physiotherapy (
20). In their study, level of SPO
2 in NIPPV group was significantly higher than that in the group receiving respiratory physiotherapy including respiratory exercises and chest wall massage. Moreover, Holland et al. compared the efficacy of NIPPV and standard pharmaceutical therapy plus physiotherapy and reported significantly higher SPO
2 values in NIPPV group (P = 0.001) (
21). However, these findings were in contrast to the results of Placidi et al. who compared NIPPV with respiratory physiotherapy including stimulation of coughing and found no significant difference (
1). Studies on the efficacy of NIPPV for decreasing pulmonary secretions are mainly inconclusive. Fauroux et al. and Holland et al. found no significant difference in respiratory clearance between the NIPPV and respiratory physiotherapy by stimulation of cough (
21,
22). However, in the study by Fauroux et al. the fatigue of patients after clearance in NIPPV group was less than that in patients who only received respiratory physiotherapy (
22). In a recent study by Rodriguez Horta the effect of NIPPV compared to conventional chest physical therapy and positive expiratory pressure (PEP) on increasing the rate of airway clearance in CF was significant (
23). They studied 32 subjects with the mean age of 31 and used BIPAP mode for NIPPV [IPAP (10-20) Cm H
2O]. Thy reported the significant reduction in lung clearance index (LCI) in NIPPV group.
The efficacy of NIPPV for improving sleep quality of CF patients has been evaluated in a few studies. Young et al evaluated the effect of non-invasive ventilation on sleep quality of eight patients with CF using a sleep questionnaire (
24). They did not find a significant difference in sleep quality or PCO2 of patients when awake between the two groups of NIPPV and nasal oxygenation alone; however, significant differences were noted in nocturnal PCO
2, quality of life and nocturnal dyspnea. The findings of Young et al are in contrast to our results. This controversy may be attributed to the difference in the quality of questionnaires used in the two studies. Our questionnaire was qualitative, ordinal and self-reported by patients. Moreover, we did not have a control group. The efficacy of NIPPV was previously evaluated by Young et al. and Milross et al. (
22,
25). The study by Young et al was conducted in room air. Milross et al. used NIPPV combined with oxygen. In both studies, arterial PCO
2 significantly decreased compared to the group receiving oxygen alone; this finding was in agreement with our result and was due to the improved respiratory function by NIPPV. Also, studies performing sleep tests such as polysomnography have reported significant improvement of sleep quality in patients receiving NIPPV (
25).
Assessment of the effect of NIPPV on use of accessory respiratory muscles was strength of our study since this variable has not been evaluated before in CF patients receiving NIPPV. The results showed that despite the significant improvement in objective indices of respiratory function including reduction in arterial PCO2 and increased arterial SPO2, use of accessory respiratory muscles by patients receiving NIPPV was still significantly high. Considering the chronicity of CF and long-term changes in respiratory mechanics of these patients, correction of their respiratory habits and use of diaphragm instead of accessory respiratory muscles require long-term respiratory physiotherapy exercises in addition to the use of NIPPV to improve respiratory indices.
Also, considering the long-term course of CF, future studies with larger sample sizes are required to assess the efficacy of NIPPV in decreasing the need for hospital admissions of CF patients.
5.1. Limitations
Although we tried to carefully prepare the study, we are still aware of its limitations. First of all, the sample size is really small. It should be mentioned that this report is a part of a greater study and we hope to gather more samples in the future. Second, in this study we didn’t have any control group and the results are compared to the baseline. It seems that introducing a control group in which the mask of NIPPV is placed but the device turned off would be of value. Third, since the questionnaire was designed to measure sleep quality in our study, it seems not to provide enough evidence compared to polysomnography data as an objective measurements for sleep study.
5.3. Conclusions
Use of NIPPV in CF patients with acute or chronic respiratory failure can improve their respiratory function, nutritional status and sleep quality. Also, this method significantly enhances respiratory clearance during respiratory physiotherapy. Long-term studies on a larger group of patients are required to assess the effect of NIPPV on survival of CF patients.