Figure 5From: Efficacy and safety of non-invasive ventilation in the treatment of acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema – a systematic review and meta-analysisResults and pooled analysis of absolute risk differences (RDs) for the outcomes (a) need for endotracheal intubation, (b) mortality and (c) acute myocardial infarction in trials comparing of continuous positive airway pressure ventilation (CPAP) versus non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV) in acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema patients patients. Subgroup analysis with stratification by baseline PaCO2 level.Back to article page