Henderson-Smart D J, Cools F, Bhuta T, Offringa M
Queen Elizabeth II Research Institute, NSW Centre for Perinatal Health Services Research, Building DO2, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia, 2006.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Jul 18(3):CD000104. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000104.pub2.
Respiratory failure due to lung immaturity is a major cause of mortality in preterm infants. Although the use of intermittent positive pressure ventilation (IPPV) in neonates with respiratory failure saves lives, its use is associated with lung injury and chronic lung disease (CLD). Conventional IPPV is provided at 30-80 breaths per minute, while a newer form of ventilation called high frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) provides 'breaths' at 10 - 15 cycles per second. This has been shown to result in less lung injury in experimental studies.
The objective of this review is to determine the effect of the elective use of high frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) as compared to conventional ventilation (CV) in preterm infants who are mechanically ventilated for respiratory distress syndrome (RDS), on the incidence of chronic lung disease, mortality and other complications associated with prematurity and assisted ventilation.
Searches were made of the Oxford Database of Perinatal Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, previous reviews including cross references, abstracts, conferences and symposia proceedings, expert informants, journal hand searching by the Cochrane Collaboration, mainly in the English language. The search was updated in April 2007.
Randomised controlled trials comparing HFOV and CV in preterm or low birth weight infants with pulmonary dysfunction, mainly due to RDS, who were given IPPV. Randomisation and commencement of treatment needed to be as soon as possible after the start of IPPV and usually in the first 12 hours of life.
The methodological quality of each trial was independently reviewed by the various authors. The standard effect measures are relative risk (RR) and risk difference (RD). From 1/RD the number needed to treat (NNT) to produce one outcome were calculated. For all measures of effect, 95% confidence intervals were used. In subgroup analyses the 99% CIs are also given for summary RRs in the text. Meta-analysis was performed using a fixed effects model. Where heterogeneity was over 50%, the random effects RR is also given.
Fifteen eligible studies of 3,585 infants were included. Meta-analysis comparing HFOV with CV revealed no evidence of effect on mortality at 28 - 30 days of age or at approximately term equivalent age. These results were consistent across studies and in subgroup analyses. The effect of HFOV on CLD in survivors at term equivalent gestational age was inconsistent across studies and the reduction was of borderline significance overall. Subgroups of trials showed a significant reduction in CLD with HFOV when high volume strategy for HFOV was used, when piston oscillators were used for HFOV, when lung protective strategies for CV were not used, when randomisation occurred at two to six hours of age, and when inspiratory:expiratory ratio of 1:2 was used for HFOV. In the meta-analysis of all trials, pulmonary air leaks occurred more frequently in the HFOV group. In some studies, short-term neurological morbidity with HFOV was found, but this effect was not statistically significant overall. The subgroup of two trials not using a high volume strategy with HFOV found increased rates of Grade 3 or 4 intraventricular haemorrhage and of periventricular leukomalacia. An adverse effect of HFOV on long-term neurodevelopment was found in one large trial but not in the five other trials that reported this outcome. The rate of retinopathy of prematurity is reduced overall in the HFOV group.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no clear evidence that elective HFOV offers important advantages over CV when used as the initial ventilation strategy to treat preterm infants with acute pulmonary dysfunction. There may be a small reduction in the rate of CLD with HFOV use, but the evidence is weakened by the inconsistency of this effect across trials and the overall borderline significance. Future trials on elective HFOV should target those infants who are at most risk of CLD (extremely preterm infants), compare different strategies for generating HFOV and CV, and report important long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes.
肺发育不成熟导致的呼吸衰竭是早产儿死亡的主要原因。虽然对呼吸衰竭的新生儿使用间歇正压通气(IPPV)可挽救生命,但其使用与肺损伤和慢性肺病(CLD)相关。传统的IPPV以每分钟30 - 80次呼吸频率进行,而一种称为高频振荡通气(HFOV)的新型通气方式以每秒10 - 15次“呼吸”频率进行。实验研究表明,这可减少肺损伤。
本综述的目的是确定与传统通气(CV)相比,对因呼吸窘迫综合征(RDS)接受机械通气的早产儿选择性使用高频振荡通气(HFOV),对慢性肺病发病率、死亡率以及与早产和辅助通气相关的其他并发症的影响。
检索了牛津围产期试验数据库、MEDLINE、EMBASE、先前的综述(包括交叉参考文献、摘要、会议和研讨会论文集)、专家信息提供者,主要由Cochrane协作网进行期刊手工检索,主要为英文文献。检索于2007年4月更新。
比较HFOV和CV在主要因RDS导致肺功能障碍的早产或低出生体重婴儿中的随机对照试验,这些婴儿接受了IPPV。随机分组和治疗开始需在IPPV开始后尽快进行,通常在出生后的前12小时内。
各作者独立审查每个试验的方法学质量。标准效应测量指标为相对危险度(RR)和危险度差值(RD)。根据1/RD计算产生一个结果所需的治疗人数(NNT)。对于所有效应测量指标,使用95%置信区间。在亚组分析中,文本中还给出了汇总RR的99%置信区间。采用固定效应模型进行荟萃分析。当异质性超过50%时,也给出随机效应RR。
纳入了15项涉及3585名婴儿的合格研究。比较HFOV与CV的荟萃分析显示,在28 - 30日龄或约足月等效年龄时,未发现对死亡率有影响的证据。这些结果在各项研究及亚组分析中均一致。HFOV对足月等效胎龄存活者CLD的影响在各项研究中不一致,总体降低幅度具有临界显著性。试验亚组显示,当采用HFOV的高容量策略、使用活塞振荡器进行HFOV、未采用CV的肺保护策略、在2至6小时龄时进行随机分组以及HFOV采用1:2的吸气:呼气比时,HFOV可显著降低CLD。在所有试验的荟萃分析中,HFOV组肺空气泄漏更频繁。在一些研究中,发现HFOV有短期神经功能障碍,但总体而言这种影响无统计学意义。两项未采用HFOV高容量策略的试验亚组发现,3级或4级脑室内出血及脑室周围白质软化的发生率增加。一项大型试验发现HFOV对长期神经发育有不良影响,但其他五项报告该结果的试验未发现此影响。总体而言,HFOV组早产儿视网膜病变发生率降低。
没有明确证据表明,在作为治疗急性肺功能障碍早产儿的初始通气策略时,选择性使用HFOV比CV有重要优势。使用HFOV可能会使CLD发生率略有降低,但该效应在各项试验中不一致且总体具有临界显著性,削弱了这一证据。未来关于选择性HFOV的试验应针对CLD风险最高的婴儿(极早产儿),比较产生HFOV和CV的不同策略,并报告重要的长期神经发育结局。