Neetu Singh1, Matthew J McNally2, Robert A Darnall3. 1. Department of Pediatrics neetu.singh@hitchcock.org. 2. Department of Respiratory Therapy. 3. Department of Neonatology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite many advances in respiratory care and mechanical ventilation, neonatologists lack an objective tool to aid in decision making for timely extubation. Electrical activity of the diaphragm (EAdi), a measure of neural respiratory drive and inspiratory load, may be a useful predictor of extubation success in preterm neonates. The objective of this work was to investigate whether peak EAdi could distinguish successful versus failed extubation in mechanically ventilated preterm infants. METHODS: We examined peak EAdi as a predictor of extubation outcome in a convenience sample of 21 preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome requiring mechanical ventilation. Infants were ventilated with a VN500 ventilator using volume guarantee mode and extubated per unit protocol. Peak EAdi was continuously measured with an EAdi catheter in the esophagus to obtain data at 1-min intervals for 24 h before extubation. The primary outcome was extubation success, defined as not requiring re-intubation for at least 72 h. RESULTS: Twenty one premature infants with respiratory distress syndrome included in the study had a mean ± SD) gestational age of 28 ± 2.6 weeks and mean birthweight of 1,208 ± 611 g. The first extubation attempt occurred at a median age of 1 d (interquartile range 1-2 d). One third of the infants failed the first extubation attempt. Infants with failed extubations were significantly smaller (mean ± SD birthweight 788 ± 266 g versus 1,417 ± 632 g) and of lower gestational age (mean ± SD 26 ± 1.9 weeks versus 29 ± 2.6 weeks) compared with those with successful extubation. Mean peak EAdi before extubation did not differ between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: This small study suggests that the pre-extubation peak EAdi does not predict extubation success. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT02144363.).
BACKGROUND: Despite many advances in respiratory care and mechanical ventilation, neonatologists lack an objective tool to aid in decision making for timely extubation. Electrical activity of the diaphragm (EAdi), a measure of neural respiratory drive and inspiratory load, may be a useful predictor of extubation success in preterm neonates. The objective of this work was to investigate whether peak EAdi could distinguish successful versus failed extubation in mechanically ventilated preterm infants. METHODS: We examined peak EAdi as a predictor of extubation outcome in a convenience sample of 21 preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome requiring mechanical ventilation. Infants were ventilated with a VN500 ventilator using volume guarantee mode and extubated per unit protocol. Peak EAdi was continuously measured with an EAdi catheter in the esophagus to obtain data at 1-min intervals for 24 h before extubation. The primary outcome was extubation success, defined as not requiring re-intubation for at least 72 h. RESULTS: Twenty one premature infants with respiratory distress syndrome included in the study had a mean ± SD) gestational age of 28 ± 2.6 weeks and mean birthweight of 1,208 ± 611 g. The first extubation attempt occurred at a median age of 1 d (interquartile range 1-2 d). One third of the infants failed the first extubation attempt. Infants with failed extubations were significantly smaller (mean ± SD birthweight 788 ± 266 g versus 1,417 ± 632 g) and of lower gestational age (mean ± SD 26 ± 1.9 weeks versus 29 ± 2.6 weeks) compared with those with successful extubation. Mean peak EAdi before extubation did not differ between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: This small study suggests that the pre-extubation peak EAdi does not predict extubation success. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT02144363.).
Authors: Emma E Williams; Fahad M S Arattu Thodika; Imogen Chappelow; Nicole Chapman-Hatchett; Theodore Dassios; Anne Greenough Journal: Pediatr Res Date: 2022-05-06 Impact factor: 3.953