<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>12(5)</volume><submitter>Nam H</submitter><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>The best ventilator mode for patients receiving non-invasive ventilation (NIV) has not been clarified. This study compared the effectiveness of two pressure-targeted modes, i.e., pressure support ventilation (PSV) and pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV), in patients receiving NIV.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>This was a prospective multicentre observational study of NIV use for acute respiratory failure (ARF) in adult patients. We compared the two pressure-targeted modes in terms of NIV success and complication rates.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Among 176 patients receiving NIV, 88 patients were included in the study (PCV mode, n=29; PSV mode, n=59). The study population had a median age of 73.0 years and median body mass index of 20.8 kg/m&lt;sup>2&lt;/sup>. The applied inspiratory positive airway pr</pubmed_abstract><journal>Journal of thoracic disease</journal><pagination>2553-2562</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC7330335</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><pubmed_title>Non-invasive ventilation for acute respiratory failure: pressure support ventilation &lt;i>vs.&lt;/i> pressure-controlled ventilation.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC7330335</pmcid><pubmed_authors>Kim SW</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Lee YS</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kang HK</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Park TS</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Ha JH</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Hwang JJ</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Lee K</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Shin YM</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Chang Y</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Park S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Cho JH</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Korean NIV Study Group</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Nam H</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Non-invasive ventilation for acute respiratory failure: pressure support ventilation &lt;i>vs.&lt;/i> pressure-controlled ventilation.</name><description>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>The best ventilator mode for patients receiving non-invasive ventilation (NIV) has not been clarified. This study compared the effectiveness of two pressure-targeted modes, i.e., pressure support ventilation (PSV) and pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV), in patients receiving NIV.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>This was a prospective multicentre observational study of NIV use for acute respiratory failure (ARF) in adult patients. We compared the two pressure-targeted modes in terms of NIV success and complication rates.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Among 176 patients receiving NIV, 88 patients were included in the study (PCV mode, n=29; PSV mode, n=59). The study population had a median age of 73.0 years and median body mass index of 20.8 kg/m&lt;sup>2&lt;/sup>. The applied inspiratory positive airway pr</description><dates><release>2020-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2020 May</publication><modification>2025-04-22T02:05:09.407Z</modification><creation>2025-04-05T20:14:49.011Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC7330335</accession><cross_references><pubmed>32642163</pubmed><doi>10.21037/jtd.2020.03.27</doi></cross_references></HashMap>