Objectives About 12.9-50% patients of SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome), require brief mechanical ventilation (MV) to save life. All the reported principles and guidelines for therapy SARS were based on experiences from clinical treatments and facts of inadequacy. Neither prospective randomized controlled trials (RCT) nor other high quality evidences were in dealing with SARS. Our objective is to seek safe and rational non-drugs interventions for patients with severe SARS by retrospectively reviewing clinical studies about MV all over the world, which include clinical guidelines, systematic reviews (SR), Meta-analysis, economic researches and adverse events. Methods To search MEDLINE and Cochrane Library with computer. According to the standards of inclucion or exclusion, the quality of the article which as assessed, and relevant data which were extracted double checked. The Meta-analysis was conducted if the studies had no heterogeneity. Results 14 papers were eligible. Due to the significant heterogeneity between these studies, further Meta-analysis could not be conducted, and the authors’ conclusions were described only. Conclusions The outcome of PPV is better than that of VPV. Patients who underwent PPV had a significantly lower mortality than that of VPV. Of course, the volutrauma should be watched. With low tidal volume and proper PEEP, or decreased FiO2, even permissive hypercapnia, the mortality and length of stay were cut down. Non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIMV) was effective in treating haemodynamical stable patients, minimizing complications and reducing medical staff infection. Patients with serious dyspnea with PaO2/FiO2lt;200, no profit of NIMV, or couldn’t tolerance hypoxaemia were unlikely to benefit from this technique and needed ventilation with endotracheal intubation. Prone position could improve PaO2/FiO2, NO maybe increased pulmonary perfusion, improved V/Q, and raised oxygenation. Furthermore, Inhaled NO sequentially (SQA) was better than Inhaled NO continuouly (CTA). Some studies implied that practice of protocol-directed weaning from mechanical ventilation implemented by nurses excelled that of traditional physician-directed weaning.