Early Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation (NIPPV) versus Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (NCPAP) for Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS) in Infants of 28-36 weeks gestational age: a Randomized Controlled Trial
Authors
Abstract:
Background: Early nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) has emerged as a primary modality of respiratory support for preterm infants withrespiratory distress syndrome (RDS). However, 30%-40% of these newborns need subsequent mechanical ventilation. Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) is a promising alternative to NCPAP, especially in post-extubation settings, apnea of prematurity, or NCPAP failure as the primary mode of respiratory support in RDS. Application of these two methods in neonates with RDS needs further studies. Methods: This open-label randomized clinical trial (RCT) was stratified by gestational age (i.e., 28-32 and 33-36 weeks). The sample included 78 infants divided into the two groups of 37 NIPPV and 41 CPAP. We compared the effect of ventilator delivered asynchronous NIPPV with NCPAP in reducing the need for invasive ventilation within 48 h of non-invasive support in infants of 28-36 weeks with RDS [onset of distress within ≤ 6 h of life with a fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) ≥ 0.25 compatible with chest radiograph]. The FiO2 > 0.3 and/or Downes score ≥ 4 were the indications for surfactant therapy administered by endotracheal tube. The infants were extubated and returned to their initial assigned mode of support within 60 min. The primary outcome was considered as failure of the allocated mode within 48 h. Results: According to our findings, the two groups showed no significant difference in terms of failure rates with 5 (13.5%) and 6 (15%) failed NIPPV and NCPAP cases (P=0.8). There was a trend toward less surfactant therapy in NIPPV [12 (32.4%) vs. 22 (53.7%), P=0.06], and lower Downes score in the first 12 h. The hazard ratio (HR; adjusted for gestation, surfactant therapy, and birth weight) for failure in NIPPV was similar to that of NCPAP (HR=1.03) at 95% confidence interval. No difference in air leaks or abdominal distension was noted between the two groups. Conclusion: Early NIPPV may not have a benefit, compared to NCPAP as a primary mode of respiratory support for infants with RDS.
similar resources
A Comparative Study of Treatment Response of Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Preterm Infants: Early Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation versus Early Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure
Background Infant respiratory distress syndrome (IRDS) is one of the main causes of serious complications and death in preterm infants. Both Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (NCPAP) and Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation (NIPPV) are known as the most common treatment strategies for IRDS. The present study intended to compare NCPAP and NIPPV in the treatment of preterm inf...
full textProphylactic nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus prophylactic nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for preterm infants
Bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), also known as chronic lung disease (CLD), is the most common serious morbidity associated with premature birth, particularly among those infants who have respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) and receive mechanical ventilation after birth. BPD is characterized by lung inflammation and scarring, which are thought to be the effects of excessive (or inadequate) vent...
full textA Comparison between Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation and Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Ventilation in the Treatment of Neonatal Respiratory Distress Syndrome
Background: Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) is a non-invasive ventilatory mode, which delivers mechanical ventilation via nasal tubes or prongs. The present study was conducted to compare the efficacy of NIPPV and nasal continuous positive airway pressure ventilation (NCPAP) in reducing the need for intubation in preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS)....
full textNasal intermittent mandatory ventilation versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure for respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized, controlled, prospective study.
OBJECTIVE To evaluate whether nasal intermittent mandatory ventilation (NIMV) compared with nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) would decrease the requirement for endotracheal ventilation in the treatment of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) in preterm infants <35 weeks. STUDY DESIGN Randomized, controlled, prospective, single-center study. Forty-one infants were randomized to...
full textEffectiveness of Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation versus Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure in Preterm Infants after Less Invasive Surfactant Administration
Background Non-invasive ventilation is increased used in preterm infants. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (nIPPV) versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) in preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) after less invasive surfactant administration (LISA). Materials and Methods In this clinical trial, eighty ...
full textMy Resources
Journal title
volume 10 issue 2
pages 1- 8
publication date 2019-06-01
By following a journal you will be notified via email when a new issue of this journal is published.
Hosted on Doprax cloud platform doprax.com
copyright © 2015-2023