Mazzella M, Bellini C, Calevo M G, Campone F, Massocco D, Mezzano P, Zullino E, Scopesi F, Arioni C, Bonacci W, Serra G
Department of Pediatrics, Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, G Gaslini Institute, University of Genova, Genova, Italy.
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2001 Sep;85(2):F86-90. doi: 10.1136/fn.85.2.f86.
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.
Randomised controlled study.
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.
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.
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.
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。
随机对照研究。
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。
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。
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。