Literature DB >> 28091776

Nasal masks or binasal prongs for delivering continuous positive airway pressure in preterm neonates-a randomised trial.

Aparna Chandrasekaran1, Anu Thukral1, M Jeeva Sankar1, Ramesh Agarwal1, Vinod K Paul1, Ashok K Deorari2.   

Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) delivered using nasal masks with binasal prongs. We randomly allocated 72 neonates between 26 and 32 weeks gestation to receive bubble CPAP by either nasal mask (n = 37) or short binasal prongs (n = 35). Primary outcome was mean FiO2 requirement at 6, 12 and 24 h of CPAP initiation and the area under curve (AUC) of FiO2 against time during the first 24 h (FiO2 AUC0-24). Secondary outcomes were the incidence of CPAP failure and nasal trauma. FiO2 requirement at 6, 12 and 24 h (mean (SD); 25 (5.8) vs. 27.9 (8); 23.8 (4.5) vs. 25.4 (6.8) and 22.6 (6.8) vs. 22.7 (3.3)) as well as FiO2 AUC0-24 (584.0 (117.8) vs. 610.6 (123.6)) were similar between the groups. There was no difference in the incidence of CPAP failure (14 vs. 20%; relative risk 0.67; 95% confidence interval 0.24-1.93). Incidence of severe nasal trauma was lower with the use of nasal masks (0 vs. 31%; p < .001).
CONCLUSIONS: Nasal masks appear to be as efficacious as binasal prongs in providing CPAP. Masks are associated with lower risk of severe nasal trauma. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CTRI2012/08/002868 What is Known? • Binasal prongs are better than single nasal and nasopharyngeal prongs for delivering continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in preventing need for re-intubation. • It is unclear if they are superior to newer generation nasal masks in preterm neonates requiring CPAP. What is New? • Oxygen requirement during the first 24 h of CPAP delivery is comparable with use of nasal masks and binasal prongs. • Use of nasal masks is, however, associated with significantly lower risk of severe grades of nasal injury.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Continuous positive airway pressure; Nasal; Preterm; Randomised trial

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28091776     DOI: 10.1007/s00431-017-2851-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Pediatr        ISSN: 0340-6199            Impact factor:   3.183


  25 in total

1.  Predictors of failure of nasal continuous positive airway pressure in treatment of preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome.

Authors:  N Y Boo; A L Zuraidah; N L Lim; M A Zulfiqar
Journal:  J Trop Pediatr       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 1.165

2.  In vitro comparison of nasal continuous positive airway pressure devices for neonates.

Authors:  A G De Paoli; C J Morley; P G Davis; R Lau; E Hingeley
Journal:  Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 5.747

3.  Clinical prediction score for nasal CPAP failure in pre-term VLBW neonates with early onset respiratory distress.

Authors:  Mrinal S Pillai; Mari J Sankar; Kalaivani Mani; Ramesh Agarwal; Vinod K Paul; Ashok K Deorari
Journal:  J Trop Pediatr       Date:  2010-06-16       Impact factor: 1.165

Review 4.  The International Classification of Retinopathy of Prematurity revisited.

Authors: 
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2005-07

5.  Use of oxygen cannulas in extremely low birthweight infants is associated with mucosal trauma and bleeding, and possibly with coagulase-negative staphylococcal sepsis.

Authors:  Arthur E Kopelman; Donald Holbert
Journal:  J Perinatol       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 2.521

6.  Treatment strategy for iatrogenic nasal vestibular stenosis in young children.

Authors:  Lee P Smith; Soham Roy
Journal:  Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2006-03-27       Impact factor: 1.675

7.  The frequency of nasal injury in newborns due to the use of continuous positive airway pressure with prongs.

Authors:  Renata Medeiros do Nascimento; Anne Laura Costa Ferreira; Ana Cláudia Ferreira Pinheiro Coutinho; Regina Célia Sales Santos Veríssimo
Journal:  Rev Lat Am Enfermagem       Date:  2009 Jul-Aug

8.  Advantages and disadvantages of different nasal CPAP systems in newborns.

Authors:  V Buettiker; M I Hug; O Baenziger; C Meyer; B Frey
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2004-03-24       Impact factor: 17.440

9.  Randomised clinical trial of two treatment regimens of natural surfactant preparations in neonatal respiratory distress syndrome.

Authors:  C P Speer; O Gefeller; P Groneck; E Laufkötter; C Roll; L Hanssler; K Harms; E Herting; H Boenisch; J Windeler
Journal:  Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 5.747

Review 10.  Devices and pressure sources for administration of nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) in preterm neonates.

Authors:  A G De Paoli; P G Davis; B Faber; C J Morley
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2008-01-23
View more
  3 in total

1.  Impact of Systematic Training and CPAP Checklist in the Prevention of NCPAP Related Nasal Injuries in Neonates- A Quality Improvement Study.

Authors:  Suja Mariam; Siddartha Buddhavarapu
Journal:  Indian J Pediatr       Date:  2020-01-16       Impact factor: 1.967

2.  'Nasal mask' in comparison with 'nasal prongs' or 'rotation of nasal mask with nasal prongs' reduce the incidence of nasal injury in preterm neonates supported on nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP): A randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Tanveer Bashir; Srinivas Murki; Sai Kiran; Venkat Kallem Reddy; Tejo Pratap Oleti
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-01-31       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 3.  Systematic Reviews in Neonatal Respiratory Care: Are Some Conclusions Misleading?

Authors:  Andres Maturana; Fernando Moya; Steven M Donn
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2020-01-31       Impact factor: 3.418

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.