Randomized trial comparing natural and synthetic surfactant: increased infection rate after natural surfactant?

The efficacy of a natural porcine surfactant and a synthetic surfactant were compared in a randomized trial. In three neonatal intensive care units, 228 neonates with respiratory distress and a ratio of arterial to alveolar partial pressure of oxygen <0.22 were randomly assigned to receive either Curosurf 100 mgkg-1 or Exosurf Neonatal 5 ml.kg-1. After Curosurf, the fraction of inspired oxygen was lower from 15 min (0.45 +/- 0.22 vs 0.70 +/- 0.22, p = 0.0001) to 6 h (0.48 +/- 0.26 vs 0.64 +/- 0.23, p = 0.0001) and the mean airway pressure was lower at 1 h (8.3 +/- 3.2 mm H20 vs 9.4 +/- 3.1 mm H20, p = 0.01). Thereafter the respiratory parameters were similar. The duration of mechanical ventilation (median 6 vs 5 d) and the duration of oxygen supplementation (median 5 vs 4 d) were similar for Curosurf and Exosurf. After Curosurf, C-reactive protein value over 40 mg l-1 occurred in 45% (vs 12%; RR 3.62, 95%CI 2.12-6.17, p = 0.001), leukopenia in 52% (vs 28%; RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.31-2.61, p = 0.001) and bacteraemia in 11% (vs 4%; RR 3.17, 95% CI 1.05-9.52, p < 0.05). We conclude that when given as rescue therapy Curosurf had no advantage compared with Exosurf in addition to the more effective initial response. Curosurf may increase the risk of infection.

RCT Entities:   Population Interventions Outcomes