...
首页> 外文期刊>Pediatric Pulmonology >Nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) or noninvasive neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NIV‐NAVA) for preterm infants with respiratory distress after birth: A randomized controlled trial
【24h】

Nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) or noninvasive neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NIV‐NAVA) for preterm infants with respiratory distress after birth: A randomized controlled trial

机译:鼻腔连续阳性气道压力(NCPAP)或非侵入性的神经调整的通风助剂(NIV-NAVA)用于出生后呼吸窘迫的早产儿:随机对照试验

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Abstract Objectives To compare rates of treatment failure between the use of nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) and noninvasive neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NIV‐NAVA) in infants with respiratory distress after birth. Methods A randomized, unblinded, double‐center trial was conducted in infants with birth weights (BWs) less than or equal to 1500?g and respiratory distress receiving noninvasive respiratory support for less than or equal to 48?hours of life; some infants were initially treated with minimally invasive surfactant therapy as the standard of care. Primary outcome: need for endotracheal intubation with use of mechanical ventilation (MV) at less than or equal to 72?hours of life using prespecified failure criteria. Secondary outcomes: use of surfactant, duration of noninvasive support, duration of MV, bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) and death. Results A total of 123 infants were included (NCPAP group?=?64 and NIV‐NAVA group?=?59). Population characteristics were similar between groups. No difference in the primary outcome was observed: NCPAP?=?10 (15.6%) and NIV‐NAVA?=?12 (20.3%), P ?=?.65. Groups were also similar in the use of surfactant (19 vs 17), duration of noninvasive support (147?±?181?hours vs 127?±?137?hours), BPD incidence and death. However, duration of MV was significantly longer in NCPAP group (95.6?±?45.8?hours vs 28.25?±?34.1?hour), P ?=?.01. Conclusion In infants with respiratory distress after birth, no differences in treatment failures were observed between NIV‐NAVA and NCPAP. These results require further evaluation in a larger study.
机译:摘要在出生后患有呼吸窘迫的婴儿使用鼻连续正气道压力(NCPAP)和非侵入性神经调整的通风辅助(NIV-NAVA)之间的治疗失败率的摘要目标。方法方法是随机,未粘连的双中心试验,在婴儿出生权重(BWS)小于或等于1500?G和呼吸窘迫,接受非侵入性呼吸支撑率小于或等于48个小时;最初用微创的表面活性剂治疗初始治疗一些婴儿作为护理标准。主要结果:需要使用机械通气(MV)的气管膜插管,使用预定的故障标准使用机械通风(MV)。二次结果:使用表面活性剂,非侵入性持续持续时间,MV,支气管扩张持续时间(BPD)和死亡。结果总共包括123名婴儿(NCPAP组?=?64和NIV-NAVA组?=?59)。人口特征在群体之间相似。没有观察到主要结果的差异:NCPAP?=?10(15.6%)和NIV-Nava?=?12(20.3%),P?= 65。在使用表面活性剂(19 Vs 17),非侵入性载体持续时间(147?±181?小时Vs 127?±137?小时),BPD发病率和死亡,组也是类似的。然而,NCPAP组MV的持续时间明显更长(95.6?±45.8小时与28.25?±34.1小时),p?= 01。结论出生后患有呼吸窘迫的婴儿,在NIV-NAVA和NCPAP之间观察到治疗失败的差异。这些结果需要进一步评估更大的研究。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号