Literature DB >> 10636595

Comparing the effects of nasal synchronized intermittent positive pressure ventilation (nSIPPV) and nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) after extubation in very low birth weight infants.

C Moretti1, C Gizzi, P Papoff, S Lampariello, M Capoferri, G Calcagnini, G Bucci.   

Abstract

In this study we hypothesized that nasal synchronized intermittent positive pressure ventilation (nSIPPV) would provide more ventilatory support than nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) in the immediate post-extubation period in very low birth weight (VLBW) infants. We tested this hypothesis by comparing the effects of these two ventilatory techniques on ventilation, gas exchange, and patient inspiratory effort in 11 preterm infants immediately after extubation. All neonates studied (BW: 1141+/-(SEM) 53 g; GA: 28.1+/-(SEM) 0.5 wks) had received mechanical ventilation because of respiratory distress at birth and were extubated by day 14 of life. Nasal SIPPV and nCPAP were applied in random order to each infant after extubation so that each was his/her own control. Both nCPAP and nSIPPV were delivered at end-expiratory pressures (PEEP) of 3 cm H2O. Inspiratory times (Ti) and peak inspiratory pressures set during nSIPPV were the same as those used at the time of extubation. Recordings lasted 45 min in each mode of ventilation. Tidal volume (Vt), minute volume (Ve), respiratory rate (RR), airway pressure (Paw), transcutaneous PO2 (TcPO2) and PCO2 (TcPCO2) as well as phasic esophageal pressure deflections (Pe), as an estimate of inspiratory effort, were measured. The measurements obtained during both modes of ventilation indicated significant differences between the two techniques. Indeed, application of nSIPPV was associated with a statistically significant increase in Vt and Ve. In addition, Pe decreased by 30% during nSIPPV (P<0.01). TcPCO2 was statistically significantly lower during nSIPPV than nCPAP, and RR as well. These data therefore suggest that nSIPPV may provide more ventilatory support than nCPAP in the post-extubation period with less patient inspiratory effort.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10636595     DOI: 10.1016/s0378-3782(99)00046-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Early Hum Dev        ISSN: 0378-3782            Impact factor:   2.079


  18 in total

Review 1.  Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for preterm neonates after extubation.

Authors:  Brigitte Lemyre; Peter G Davis; Antonio G De Paoli; Haresh Kirpalani
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-02-01

2.  Adaptive mechanical backup ventilation for preterm infants on respiratory assist modes - a pilot study.

Authors:  Susanne Herber-Jonat; Esther Rieger-Fackeldey; Helmut Hummler; Andreas Schulze
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2006-01-24       Impact factor: 17.440

Review 3.  Neonatal nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation: what do we know in 2007?

Authors:  Louise S Owen; Colin J Morley; Peter G Davis
Journal:  Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 5.747

4.  Nasal ventilation alters mesenchymal cell turnover and improves alveolarization in preterm lambs.

Authors:  Brent Reyburn; Marlana Li; Drew B Metcalfe; Nicholas J Kroll; Jeremy Alvord; Albert Wint; Mar Janna Dahl; Jiancheng Sun; Li Dong; Zheng-Ming Wang; Christopher Callaway; Robert A McKnight; Laurie Moyer-Mileur; Bradley A Yoder; Donald M Null; Robert H Lane; Kurt H Albertine
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2008-06-12       Impact factor: 21.405

Review 5.  New modes of mechanical ventilation in the preterm newborn: evidence of benefit.

Authors:  Nelson Claure; Eduardo Bancalari
Journal:  Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed       Date:  2007-09-05       Impact factor: 5.747

Review 6.  The role of surfactant and non-invasive mechanical ventilation in early management of respiratory distress syndrome in premature infants.

Authors:  Narayan Prabhu Iyer; Maroun Jean Mhanna
Journal:  World J Pediatr       Date:  2014-08-15       Impact factor: 2.764

7.  Synchronized nasal intermittent positive-pressure ventilation and neonatal outcomes.

Authors:  Vineet Bhandari; Neil N Finer; Richard A Ehrenkranz; Shampa Saha; Abhik Das; Michele C Walsh; William A Engle; Krisa P VanMeurs
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2009-07-27       Impact factor: 7.124

8.  Work of breathing during HHHFNC and synchronised NIPPV following extubation.

Authors:  Elinor Charles; Katie A Hunt; Gerrard F Rafferty; Janet L Peacock; Anne Greenough
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  2018-10-30       Impact factor: 3.183

9.  Infant flow biphasic nasal continuous positive airway pressure (BP- NCPAP) vs. infant flow NCPAP for the facilitation of extubation in infants' ≤ 1,250 grams: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Karel O'Brien; Craig Campbell; Leanne Brown; Lisa Wenger; Vibhuti Shah
Journal:  BMC Pediatr       Date:  2012-04-04       Impact factor: 2.125

Review 10.  Synchronized mechanical ventilation for respiratory support in newborn infants.

Authors:  Anne Greenough; Thomas E Rossor; Adesh Sundaresan; Vadivelam Murthy; Anthony D Milner
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-09-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.