Literature DB >> 22189698

Bubble vs conventional continuous positive airway pressure for prevention of extubation failure in preterm very low birth weight infants: a pilot study.

Sucheta Yadav1, Anu Thukral, M Jeeva Sankar, V Sreenivas, Ashok K Deorari, Vinod K Paul, Ramesh Agarwal.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of bubble and conventional nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in preventing extubation failure (EF) in preterm infants.
METHODS: Infants of gestation ≤32 wk and birth weight <1500 g, ready for initial extubation within first wk of life were randomly allocated to either bubble (n = 16) or conventional (n = 16) CPAP. A standardized protocol was used for extubation. Bubble CPAP was delivered by Fischer and Paykel equipment using short binasal prongs and conventional CPAP was delivered by a ventilator using Argyle short binasal prongs. CPAP was initiated at a pressure of 4-6 cm of H(2)O and FiO(2) of 0.4-0.5 and adjusted to maintain normal saturation (90-93%) and comfortable breathing. Primary outcome was EF, defined as need for mechanical ventilation within 72 h of extubation.
RESULTS: Baseline characteristics including birth weight (g; 1027 ± 243 vs. 1018 ± 227; p = 0.83), gestation (wk; 28.7 ± 1.8 vs. 28.4 ± 1.6; p = 0.30), infants <28 wk gestation (6 vs. 7, p = 0.72) were comparable between the two groups. Respiratory distress syndrome was the indication for ventilation in 13 (81%) and 14 (87%) infants on bubble CPAP and conventional CPAP groups respectively. (p = 0.99). There was no difference in the EF rates between the bubble (n = 4) and conventional CPAP (n = 9) groups. (RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.20-1.2; p = 0.14). Median time to extubation failure was also comparable between the two groups (h; median [range]: 29 [14-49] vs. 17 [7-28]; p = 0.35).
CONCLUSIONS: The possibility that bubble CPAP may be associated with reduced EF as suggested in this pilot study requires further investigation in an adequately powered multicentric study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22189698     DOI: 10.1007/s12098-011-0651-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indian J Pediatr        ISSN: 0019-5456            Impact factor:   1.967


  21 in total

1.  Effects of flow rate on delivery of bubble continuous positive airway pressure in an in vitro model.

Authors:  Tsyr-Yuh Ho; Shan-Fu Ou; Shih-Hui Huang; Chi-Ning Lee; Luo-Ping Ger; Kai-Sheng Hsieh; Hui-Ying Cheng; Wei Yang Lee; Ken-Pen Weng
Journal:  Pediatr Neonatol       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 2.083

2.  Bubble CPAP: is the noise important? An in vitro study.

Authors:  J Jane Pillow; Javeed N Travadi
Journal:  Pediatr Res       Date:  2005-03-17       Impact factor: 3.756

Review 3.  The International Classification of Retinopathy of Prematurity revisited.

Authors: 
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2005-07

4.  Nasal continuous positive airway pressure: does bubbling improve gas exchange?

Authors:  C J Morley; R Lau; A De Paoli; P G Davis
Journal:  Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 5.747

5.  Understanding the use of continuous oscillating positive airway pressure (bubble CPAP) to treat neonatal respiratory disease: an engineering approach.

Authors:  P I Manilal-Reddy; A M Al-Jumaily
Journal:  J Med Eng Technol       Date:  2009

6.  A comparison of underwater bubble continuous positive airway pressure with ventilator-derived continuous positive airway pressure in premature neonates ready for extubation.

Authors:  K S Lee; M S Dunn; M Fenwick; A T Shennan
Journal:  Biol Neonate       Date:  1998

7.  Nosocomial bacterial infections in very low birth weight infants.

Authors:  P J Thompson; A Greenough; M F Hird; J Philpott-Howard; H R Gamsu
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 3.183

8.  A randomized controlled trial of post-extubation bubble continuous positive airway pressure versus Infant Flow Driver continuous positive airway pressure in preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome.

Authors:  Samir Gupta; Sunil K Sinha; Win Tin; Steven M Donn
Journal:  J Pediatr       Date:  2009-02-23       Impact factor: 4.406

Review 9.  Extubation failure: magnitude of the problem, impact on outcomes, and prevention.

Authors:  Robert C Rothaar; Scott K Epstein
Journal:  Curr Opin Crit Care       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 3.687

Review 10.  Nasal continuous positive airways pressure immediately after extubation for preventing morbidity in preterm infants.

Authors:  P G Davis; D J Henderson-Smart
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2003
View more
  7 in total

1.  Letter to editor.

Authors:  Subhash Chandra Shaw; Anupama Chowdhary
Journal:  Med J Armed Forces India       Date:  2015-01

2.  Trends and outcome of low birth weight (LBW) infants in India.

Authors:  B Vishnu Bhat; B Adhisivam
Journal:  Indian J Pediatr       Date:  2012-11-22       Impact factor: 1.967

3.  Nasal continuous positive airway pressure therapy in a non-tertiary neonatal unit: reduced need for up-transfers.

Authors:  Sai Kiran; Srinivas Murki; Oleti Tejo Pratap; Hemasree Kandraju; Anupama Reddy
Journal:  Indian J Pediatr       Date:  2014-06-21       Impact factor: 1.967

4.  A Randomized Trial Comparing Efficacy of Bubble and Ventilator Derived Nasal CPAP in Very Low Birth Weight Neonates with Respiratory Distress.

Authors:  Sheetal Agarwal; Arti Maria; Mahesh K Roy; Ankit Verma
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2016-09-01

5.  Use of Nasal Bubble CPAP in Children with Hypoxemic Clinical Pneumonia-Report from a Resource Limited Set-Up.

Authors:  Muralidharan Jayashree; H B KiranBabu; Sunit Singhi; Karthi Nallasamy
Journal:  J Trop Pediatr       Date:  2015-09-30       Impact factor: 1.165

6.  Decreasing Chronic Lung Disease Associated with Bubble CPAP Technology: Experience at Five Years.

Authors:  Tricia A Miller; Jing Li; Stella Riddell; Steven C Barkley
Journal:  Pediatr Qual Saf       Date:  2020-04-10

7.  Vitamin D supplementation among Bangladeshi children under-five years of age hospitalised for severe pneumonia: A randomised placebo controlled trial.

Authors:  Fahmida Chowdhury; Abu Sadat Mohammad Sayeem Bin Shahid; Mosharrat Tabassum; Irin Parvin; Probir Kumar Ghosh; Mohammad Iqbal Hossain; Nur Haque Alam; A S G Faruque; Sayeeda Huq; Lubaba Shahrin; Nusrat Homaira; Zakiul Hassan; Zubair Akhtar; S Mah-E-Muneer; George J Fuchs; Tahmeed Ahmed; Mohammod Jobayer Chisti
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-02-19       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.