O'Donnell C, Davis P, Morley C
Division of Newborn Services, Royal Women's Hospital Melbourne, 132 Grattan Street, Carlton, Victoria, Australia, 3053.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004 Oct 18;2003(4):CD004341. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004341.pub2.
Effective ventilation is the key to successful neonatal resuscitation. Positive pressure ventilation is initiated with manual ventilation devices which may or not deliver positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP). PEEP is known to have beneficial effects in preterm animal models and its use is ubiquitous in mechanical ventilation in neonatal intensive care.
To determine whether the use of PEEP during positive pressure ventilation at neonatal resuscitation reduces mortality or morbidity.
The standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group was used. Pub Med (1966 to May 2004) was searched using the MeSH headings Infant, Newborn, Resuscitation, Positive Pressure Respiration and the text words Positive End-Expiratory Pressure or PEEP. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2004) was searched using text words Newborn and Resuscitation. No language restrictions were applied. The abstracts of the Society for Pediatric Research and the European Society for Pediatric Research, were searched from 1995-May 2004. Abstracts were also searched in Anaesthesiology, Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia, British Journal of Anaesthesia, Anaesthesia and Intensive Care and Anaesthesia and Analgesia.
Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing ventilation devices providing PEEP with those not providing PEEP in the resuscitation of infants at birth.
Assessment of methodology regarding blinding of randomisation, intervention and outcome measurements as well as completeness of follow-up was planned. We planned to evaluate the treatment effect using a fixed effects model using relative risk (RR), relative risk reduction, risk difference (RD) and number needed to treat (NNT) for categorical data and using mean, standard deviation and weighted mean difference (WMD) for continuous data. We planned an evaluation of heterogeneity to help determine the suitability of pooling results.
No studies were found meeting the criteria for inclusion in this review.
REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to determine the efficacy and safety of PEEP during positive pressure ventilation at neonatal resuscitation. Randomised clinical trials comparing positive pressure ventilation with and without PEEP at neonatal resuscitation are warranted.
有效的通气是新生儿复苏成功的关键。正压通气通过手动通气设备启动,这些设备可能会也可能不会提供呼气末正压(PEEP)。已知PEEP在早产动物模型中有有益作用,并且在新生儿重症监护的机械通气中广泛使用。
确定在新生儿复苏的正压通气过程中使用PEEP是否能降低死亡率或发病率。
采用Cochrane新生儿综述组的标准检索策略。使用医学主题词“婴儿、新生儿、复苏、正压呼吸”以及文本词“呼气末正压”或“PEEP”检索了PubMed(1966年至2004年5月)。使用文本词“新生儿”和“复苏”检索了Cochrane对照试验中央注册库(《Cochrane图书馆》,2004年第1期)。未设语言限制。检索了1995年至2004年5月期间的儿科学会和欧洲儿科学会的摘要。还检索了《麻醉学》、《加拿大麻醉学杂志》、《英国麻醉学杂志》、《麻醉与重症监护》以及《麻醉与镇痛》中的摘要。
比较在出生时婴儿复苏中提供PEEP的通气设备与不提供PEEP的通气设备的随机和半随机对照试验。
计划评估关于随机化、干预和结果测量的盲法以及随访完整性的方法。我们计划使用固定效应模型评估治疗效果,对于分类数据使用相对风险(RR)、相对风险降低、风险差(RD)和治疗所需人数(NNT),对于连续数据使用均值、标准差和加权均值差(WMD)。我们计划评估异质性以帮助确定合并结果的适用性。
未发现符合本综述纳入标准的研究。
没有足够的证据来确定在新生儿复苏的正压通气过程中PEEP的疗效和安全性。有必要进行比较新生儿复苏时使用和不使用PEEP的正压通气的随机临床试验。