BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In preterm infants receivingsupplemental oxygen, routine manual control (RMC) of the fraction of inspired oxygen (FIO2) is often difficult and time consuming. We developed a system for closed-loop automatic control (CLAC) of the FIO2 and demonstrated its short-term safety and efficacy in a single-center study. The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that this system is more effective than RMC alone in maintaining arterial oxygen saturation within target levels when evaluated over 24 hours under routine conditions and with different target levels. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, randomized controlled, crossover clinical trial in 34 preterm infants receivingmechanical ventilation or nasal continuous positive airway pressure and supplemental oxygen. Twenty-four-hour periods with RMC were compared with 24-hour periods of RMC supported by CLAC. RESULTS: The median (range) percentage of time with arterial oxygen saturation levels within target range was 61.4 (31.5-99.5) for RMC and 71.2 (44.0-95.4) for CLAC (P < .001). The median (range) number of manual FIO2 adjustments was reduced from 77.0 (0.0-224.0) for RMC to 52.0 (10.0-317.0) for CLAC (P = .007). CONCLUSIONS:CLAC may improve oxygen administration to preterm infants receivingmechanical ventilation or nasal continuous positive airway pressure while reducing workload related to RMC.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In preterm infants receiving supplemental oxygen, routine manual control (RMC) of the fraction of inspired oxygen (FIO2) is often difficult and time consuming. We developed a system for closed-loop automatic control (CLAC) of the FIO2 and demonstrated its short-term safety and efficacy in a single-center study. The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that this system is more effective than RMC alone in maintaining arterial oxygen saturation within target levels when evaluated over 24 hours under routine conditions and with different target levels. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, randomized controlled, crossover clinical trial in 34 preterm infants receiving mechanical ventilation or nasal continuous positive airway pressure and supplemental oxygen. Twenty-four-hour periods with RMC were compared with 24-hour periods of RMC supported by CLAC. RESULTS: The median (range) percentage of time with arterial oxygen saturation levels within target range was 61.4 (31.5-99.5) for RMC and 71.2 (44.0-95.4) for CLAC (P < .001). The median (range) number of manual FIO2 adjustments was reduced from 77.0 (0.0-224.0) for RMC to 52.0 (10.0-317.0) for CLAC (P = .007). CONCLUSIONS:CLAC may improve oxygen administration to preterm infants receiving mechanical ventilation or nasal continuous positive airway pressure while reducing workload related to RMC.
Authors: Omid Sadeghi Fathabadi; Timothy Gale; Kevin Wheeler; Gemma Plottier; Louise S Owen; J C Olivier; Peter A Dargaville Journal: J Clin Monit Comput Date: 2016-02-20 Impact factor: 2.502
Authors: Matthias C Hütten; Tom G Goos; Daan Ophelders; Maria Nikiforou; Elke Kuypers; Monique Willems; Hendrik J Niemarkt; Jenny Dankelman; Peter Andriessen; Thilo Mohns; Irwin K M Reiss; Boris W Kramer Journal: Pediatr Res Date: 2015-08-31 Impact factor: 3.756
Authors: Leeann R Pavlek; Brian K Rivera; Charles V Smith; Joanie Randle; Cory Hanlon; Kristi Small; Edward F Bell; Matthew A Rysavy; Sara Conroy; Carl H Backes Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2021-04-21 Impact factor: 6.314
Authors: Henriëtte A van Zanten; Ratna N G B Tan; Agnes van den Hoogen; Enrico Lopriore; Arjan B te Pas Journal: Eur J Pediatr Date: 2015-10-14 Impact factor: 3.183
Authors: Henriëtte A van Zanten; Steffen C Pauws; Evelien C Beks; Ben J Stenson; Enrico Lopriore; Arjan B Te Pas Journal: Eur J Pediatr Date: 2016-11-26 Impact factor: 3.183
Authors: Maria Wilinska; Thomas Bachman; Janusz Swietlinski; Maria Kostro; Marta Twardoch-Drozd Journal: BMC Pediatr Date: 2014-05-28 Impact factor: 2.125
Authors: Irene Cortés-Puch; Robert A Wesley; Michael A Carome; Robert L Danner; Sidney M Wolfe; Charles Natanson Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-05-18 Impact factor: 3.240