• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
A randomised control study comparing the Infant Flow Driver with nasal continuous positive airway pressure in preterm infants.一项比较婴儿气流驱动装置与经鼻持续气道正压通气对早产儿影响的随机对照研究。
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2001 Sep;85(2):F86-90. doi: 10.1136/fn.85.2.f86.
2
Devices and pressure sources for administration of nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) in preterm neonates.用于早产儿鼻持续气道正压通气(NCPAP)的设备和压力源。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002(4):CD002977. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002977.
3
Devices and pressure sources for administration of nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) in preterm neonates.用于早产儿鼻持续气道正压通气(NCPAP)的设备和压力源。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Jan 23;2008(1):CD002977. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002977.pub2.
4
Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for preterm neonates after extubation.经鼻间歇正压通气(NIPPV)与经鼻持续气道正压通气(NCPAP)用于早产儿拔管后
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Sep 4(9):CD003212. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003212.pub2.
5
Effect on lung function of continuous positive airway pressure administered either by infant flow driver or a single nasal prong.婴儿气流驱动装置或单鼻导管持续气道正压通气对肺功能的影响。
Eur J Pediatr. 2000 Apr;159(4):289-92. doi: 10.1007/s004310050072.
6
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.拔管后气泡持续气道正压通气与婴儿气流驱动持续气道正压通气治疗早产儿呼吸窘迫综合征的随机对照试验
J Pediatr. 2009 May;154(5):645-50. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2008.12.034. Epub 2009 Feb 23.
7
Infant Flow Driver or single prong nasal continuous positive airway pressure: short-term physiological effects.婴儿气流驱动装置或单鼻塞持续气道正压通气:短期生理效应
Acta Paediatr. 1998 Mar;87(3):325-7. doi: 10.1080/08035259850157408.
8
A randomized controlled trial of two nasal continuous positive airway pressure levels after extubation in preterm infants.经鼻持续气道正压通气两种水平用于拔管后早产儿的随机对照试验
J Pediatr. 2014 Jan;164(1):46-51. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2013.08.040. Epub 2013 Oct 1.
9
Comparison of non-synchronized nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure as post-extubation respiratory support in preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized controlled trial.非同步鼻间歇正压通气与经鼻持续气道正压通气用于呼吸窘迫综合征早产儿拔管后呼吸支持的比较:一项随机对照试验
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016;29(10):1546-51. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2015.1059809. Epub 2015 Jul 28.
10
[Single nasal prong versus infant flow driver in very low birth weight infants: clinical efficacy of two modes of nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP)].极低出生体重儿中单鼻导管与婴儿流量驱动装置:两种经鼻持续气道正压通气(CPAP)模式的临床疗效
Przegl Lek. 2002;59 Suppl 1:54-6.

引用本文的文献

1
Bubble devices versus other pressure sources for nasal continuous positive airway pressure in preterm infants.气泡装置与其他压力源在早产儿中应用鼻塞持续气道正压通气的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Mar 31;3(3):CD015130. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD015130.
2
Masks versus prongs as interfaces for nasal continuous positive airway pressure in preterm infants.鼻塞持续气道正压通气中鼻塞与鼻前庭罩接口的比较:一项系统评价和荟萃分析
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Nov 14;11(11):CD015129. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD015129.
3
Non-invasive duo positive airway pressure ventilation versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure in preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized controlled trial.双水平正压通气与鼻塞持续气道正压通气治疗呼吸窘迫综合征早产儿的随机对照研究。
BMC Pediatr. 2021 Jul 6;21(1):301. doi: 10.1186/s12887-021-02741-w.
4
Non-Invasive Ventilatory Strategies to Decrease Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia-Where Are We in 2021?降低支气管肺发育不良的无创通气策略——2021年我们进展到哪一步了?
Children (Basel). 2021 Feb 11;8(2):132. doi: 10.3390/children8020132.
5
Preventing Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Failure: Evidence-Based and Physiologically Sound Practices from Delivery Room to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.预防持续气道正压通气失败:从产房到新生儿重症监护病房基于证据且符合生理原理的实践方法
Clin Perinatol. 2018 Jun;45(2):257-271. doi: 10.1016/j.clp.2018.01.011. Epub 2018 Feb 28.
6
The Effect of Inhaled Budesonide on the Prevention of Chronic Lung Disease in Premature Neonates with Respiratory Distress Syndrome.吸入布地奈德对预防呼吸窘迫综合征早产儿慢性肺病的作用
Int J Prev Med. 2018 Feb 8;9:15. doi: 10.4103/ijpvm.IJPVM_336_16. eCollection 2018.
7
A Comparative Study of the Effect of Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation and Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure on the Regional Brain Tissue Oximetry in Premature Newborns Weighing <1500 g.经鼻间歇正压通气与经鼻持续气道正压通气对体重<1500g早产儿局部脑组织血氧饱和度影响的比较研究
Int J Prev Med. 2017 Jun 1;8:41. doi: 10.4103/ijpvm.IJPVM_233_16. eCollection 2017.
8
Analysis and comparison of the effects of N-BiPAP and Bubble-CPAP in treatment of preterm newborns with the weight of below 1500 grams affiliated with respiratory distress syndrome: A randomised clinical trial.N-双水平气道正压通气(N-BiPAP)与鼻塞持续气道正压通气(Bubble-CPAP)治疗体重低于1500克的早产新生儿呼吸窘迫综合征的效果分析与比较:一项随机临床试验
Adv Biomed Res. 2016 Jan 27;5:3. doi: 10.4103/2277-9175.174965. eCollection 2016.
9
A Comparison of the Effect of Nasal bi-level Positive Airway Pressure and Sigh-positive Airway Pressure on the Treatment of the Preterm Newborns Weighing Less than 1500 g Affiliated with Respiratory Distress Syndrome.经鼻双水平气道正压通气与叹息样气道正压通气对治疗体重低于1500g的呼吸窘迫综合征早产儿效果的比较
Int J Prev Med. 2016 Jan 13;7:21. doi: 10.4103/2008-7802.173930. eCollection 2016.
10
Use of Nasal Bubble CPAP in Children with Hypoxemic Clinical Pneumonia-Report from a Resource Limited Set-Up.低氧血症型临床肺炎患儿中鼻泡持续气道正压通气的应用——来自资源有限环境的报告
J Trop Pediatr. 2016 Feb;62(1):69-74. doi: 10.1093/tropej/fmv063. Epub 2015 Sep 30.

本文引用的文献

1
Effect on lung function of continuous positive airway pressure administered either by infant flow driver or a single nasal prong.婴儿气流驱动装置或单鼻导管持续气道正压通气对肺功能的影响。
Eur J Pediatr. 2000 Apr;159(4):289-92. doi: 10.1007/s004310050072.
2
Randomised trial of elective continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) compared with rescue CPAP after extubation.拔管后选择性持续气道正压通气(CPAP)与挽救性CPAP的随机试验。
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 1998 Jul;79(1):F58-60. doi: 10.1136/fn.79.1.f58.
3
Infant Flow Driver or single prong nasal continuous positive airway pressure: short-term physiological effects.婴儿气流驱动装置或单鼻塞持续气道正压通气:短期生理效应
Acta Paediatr. 1998 Mar;87(3):325-7. doi: 10.1080/08035259850157408.
4
[Necrosis of the nasal columella secondary to nasal continuous positive airway pressure].
Arch Pediatr. 1997 May;4(5):485. doi: 10.1016/s0929-693x(97)86682-1.
5
Nasal deformities resulting from flow driver continuous positive airway pressure.气流驱动持续气道正压通气导致的鼻畸形
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 1996 Nov;75(3):F209-12. doi: 10.1136/fn.75.3.f209.
6
[New technique of nasal continuous positive pressure in neonatology].[新生儿科鼻腔持续正压通气新技术]
Arch Pediatr. 1996 May;3(5):452-6. doi: 10.1016/0929-693x(96)86403-7.
7
Nasal continuous positive airway pressure: experiences with a new technical approach.经鼻持续气道正压通气:一种新技术方法的经验
Acta Paediatr. 1993 Feb;82(2):210-1. doi: 10.1111/j.1651-2227.1993.tb12642.x.
8
Early treatment with nasal continuous positive airway pressure in very low-birth-weight infants.
Acta Paediatr. 1993 Feb;82(2):193-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1651-2227.1993.tb12637.x.
9
Treatment of the idiopathic respiratory-distress syndrome with continuous positive airway pressure.持续气道正压通气治疗特发性呼吸窘迫综合征
N Engl J Med. 1971 Jun 17;284(24):1333-40. doi: 10.1056/NEJM197106172842401.
10
A new device for administration of nasal continuous positive airway pressure in the newborn: an experimental study.一种用于新生儿鼻持续气道正压通气的新装置:一项实验研究。
Crit Care Med. 1988 Dec;16(12):1238-42. doi: 10.1097/00003246-198812000-00013.

一项比较婴儿气流驱动装置与经鼻持续气道正压通气对早产儿影响的随机对照研究。

A randomised control study comparing the Infant Flow Driver with nasal continuous positive airway pressure in preterm infants.

作者信息

Mazzella M, Bellini C, Calevo M G, Campone F, Massocco D, Mezzano P, Zullino E, Scopesi F, Arioni C, Bonacci W, Serra G

机构信息

Department of Pediatrics, Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, G Gaslini Institute, University of Genova, Genova, Italy.

出版信息

Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2001 Sep;85(2):F86-90. doi: 10.1136/fn.85.2.f86.

DOI:10.1136/fn.85.2.f86
PMID:11517199
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1721298/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of the Infant Flow Driver (IFD) with single prong nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) in preterm neonates affected by respiratory distress syndrome.

DESIGN

Randomised controlled study.

PATIENTS

Between September 1997 and March 1999, 36 preterm infants who were eligible for CPAP treatment were randomly selected for either nCPAP or IFD and studied prospectively for changes in oxygen requirement and/or respiratory rate. The requirement for mechanical ventilation, complications of treatment, and effects on mid-term outcome were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Use of the IFD had a significantly beneficial effect on both oxygen requirement and respiratory rate (p < 0.0001) when compared with nCPAP. Moreover, O(2) requirement and respiratory rate were significantly decreased by four hours (p < 0.001 and p < 0.03 respectively). The probability of remaining supplementary oxygen free over the first 48 hours of treatment was significantly higher in patients treated with the IFD than with nCPAP (p < 0.02). IFD treated patients had a higher success (weaning) rate (94% v 72 %) and shorter duration of treatment (49.3 (31) v 56 (29.7) hours respectively; mean (SD)), although the difference was not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

IFD appears to be a feasible device for managing respiratory distress syndrome in preterm infants, and benefits may be had with regard to oxygen requirement and respiratory rate when compared with nCPAP. The trend towards reduced requirement for mechanical ventilation, shorter clinical recovery time, and shorter duration of treatment requires further evaluation in a multicentre randomised clinical trial.

摘要

目的

比较婴儿气流驱动装置(IFD)与单鼻塞持续气道正压通气(nCPAP)治疗呼吸窘迫综合征早产儿的有效性。

设计

随机对照研究。

患者

1997年9月至1999年3月期间,36例符合CPAP治疗条件的早产儿被随机分为nCPAP组或IFD组,前瞻性研究氧需求和/或呼吸频率的变化。还评估了机械通气需求、治疗并发症及对中期结局的影响。

结果

与nCPAP相比,使用IFD对氧需求和呼吸频率均有显著有益影响(p<0.0001)。此外,氧需求和呼吸频率在4小时时显著降低(分别为p<0.001和p<0.03)。IFD治疗的患者在治疗的前48小时内无需补充氧气的概率显著高于nCPAP治疗的患者(p<0.02)。IFD治疗的患者成功率(撤机)更高(94%对72%),治疗持续时间更短(分别为49.3(31)小时对56(29.7)小时;均值(标准差)),尽管差异不显著。

结论

IFD似乎是管理早产儿呼吸窘迫综合征的一种可行装置,与nCPAP相比,在氧需求和呼吸频率方面可能有益。机械通气需求降低、临床恢复时间缩短和治疗持续时间缩短的趋势需要在多中心随机临床试验中进一步评估。