Comparison of Effectiveness of Nasal Continuous Posi tive Airway Pressure and Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation for the Initial Treatment of Preterm Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Prospective Pilot Study

Purpose: To compare respiratory and clinical outcomes between the currently used strategy of Intubation, Surfactant, Extubation (InSurE) and nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) and the alternative strategy of InSurE and nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) for the initial treatment of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) in preterm newborns ≤32 weeks. Methods: Twenty-six comparable preterm infants with RDS were included in the study; 13 were randomized to NCPAP and 13 to NIPPV. In both groups, the InSurE procedure consisted of intubation, surfactant instillation and 2 h positive pressure ventilation followed by extubation, after which spontaneously breathing newborns were placed on NCPAP or NIPPV. Results: There were no differences in demographic characteristics or cardiorespiratory status among preterm infants enrolled in the study. The reinutation rate was lower among the infants treated with NIPPV than among those on NCPAP (8% vs. 46%, P<0.05) and the rate of aminophylline use between 4 and 7 days of age of was lower in the NIPPV group compared to the NCPAP group (8% vs. 30%, P<0.05). In addition, “InSurE with NIPPV” significantly reduced the overall duration of endotracheal ventilation and shortened the time to first feed compared to “InSurE with NCPAP”. Conclusion: “InSurE with NIPPV” displayed therapeutic benefits as the initial treatment of preterm RDS when compared with the currently used ventilator strategy, “InSurE with NCPAP” by preventing re-intubation and shortening the duration of endotracheal ventilation.