You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 69, Issue 12
  • Response to: Domiciliary long term non-invasive ventilation in COPD: should we select subgroups with a better likelihood to respond to NIV in subsequent randomised controlled trials?

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
PostScript
Correspondence
Response to: Domiciliary long term non-invasive ventilation in COPD: should we select subgroups with a better likelihood to respond to NIV in subsequent randomised controlled trials?
  1. F M Struik1,2,
  2. P J Wijkstra1,2
  1. 1 Department of Pulmonology/Center for Home Mechanical Ventilation, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG), Groningen, The Netherlands
  2. 2 Groningen Research Institute for Asthma and COPD (GRIAC), University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG), Groningen, The Netherlands
  1. Correspondence to F M Struik, Department of Pulmonary Diseases/Home Mechanical Ventilation, University Medical Center Groningen, Triade gebouw AA62, Groningen 9713 GZ, The Netherlands; f.m.struik{at}umcg.nl

https://doi.org/10.1136/thoraxjnl-2014-206066

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Dear editor,

    We thank Borel et al 1 for their comments on our paper.2 Borel and colleagues suggest that future studies should focus on specific COPD subgroups who have better likelihood of response to chronic non-invasive ventilation (NIV). They recently showed that obese COPD patients respond better to NIV compared with non-obese patients.3 We completely agree with their suggestion about focusing on COPD subgroups for future studies and in fact we tried to do so as well. In our study, we investigated the benefits of chronic NIV in COPD patients after they received ventilatory support due to acute respiratory failure. However, we focused on a more specific COPD group (in the …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors FMS and PJW wrote the authors’ response. FMS was the coordinator of the study, directly involved in the project design, patient recruitment, data collection and analysis, and is the main author of the manuscript. PJW was main investigator, led the study group, contributed to the design of the project, and contributed to and approved the final study; he is the guarantor of the entire study.

    • Funding Dutch Lung Foundation (AF 3.4.06.044), Philips/Respironics, Stichting Astma Bestrijding (2010/10), Mediq TEFA.

    • Competing interests FMS reports grants from Philips/Respironics, grants from Dutch Lung Foundation, grants and non-financial support from Mediq TEFA, and grants from Stichting Astma Bestrijding during the conduct of the study. PJW reports grants from Philips/Respironics, grants from Dutch Lung Foundation, grants and non-financial support from Mediq TEFA, and grants from Stichting Astma Bestrijding during the conduct of the study; He reports fees from Philips/Respironics, RESMED and VIVISOL. Outside the study, he reports grants from RESMED, VIVISOL, Goedgebeure and Air Liquide.

    • Ethics approval Medical Ethics Committee University Medical Center Groningen.

    • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles