• 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

一项关于非同步鼻咽间歇性强制通气(nsNIMV)与经鼻持续气道正压通气(NCPAP)预防体重<1500克早产儿拔管失败的随机试验。

A randomized trial of non-synchronized Nasopharyngeal Intermittent Mandatory Ventilation (nsNIMV) vs. Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (NCPAP) in the prevention of extubation failure in pre-term < 1,500 grams.

作者信息

Khorana Meera, Paradeevisut Hathaitip, Sangtawesin Varaporn, Kanjanapatanakul Wiboon, Chotigeat Uraiwan, Ayutthaya Jintakarn Kasemsri Na

机构信息

Department of Pediatrics, Neonatology Section, Queen Sirikit National Institute of Child Health, Bangkok 10400, Thailand.

出版信息

J Med Assoc Thai. 2008 Oct;91 Suppl 3:S136-42.

PMID:19253509
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the rate of reintubation within 7 days after extubation and study the complications in premature infants who were randomized in the immediate postextubation period to either nsNIMV or NCPAP.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

This study was conducted in the neonatal unit of Queen Sirikit National Institute of Child Health between June 1 and November 30, 2006. Intubated premature infants born at GA < or = 34 weeks or with birth weight < or = 1500 gm, ready to be extubated before 4 weeks of age were recruited. Infants were randomized to either nsNIMV or NCPAP after extubation. Non-synchronized NIMV setting was the same as ventilator setting before extubation and NCPAP pressure was set at the same mean airway pressure of pre extubation ventilator value. Extubation was performed after intravenous loading dose of aminophylline. Primary outcome measurement was reintubation within 7 days of initial extubation and the secondary outcome was possible complications such as apnea, abdominal distension, gastrointestinal (GI) perforation, necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), sepsis and death.

RESULTS

A total of 70 VLBW infants were admitted to the neonatal unit during the study period. A total of 57 infants were intubated of which 48 infants were recruited for the study; 24 were in the nsNIMV group and 24 were in the NCPAP group. Infants in the nsNIMV group had mean birth weight and body weight at the start of study less than that in the NCPAP group (984.8 +/- 218 vs. 1067 +/- 214 and 1185 +/- 219 vs. 1205 +/-191, p = 0.003, 0.02). The nsNIMV group also had a higher rate of RDS and antenatal steroid used when compared to the NCPAP group (19/24 vs. 12/24 and 17/24 vs. 8/24, p = 0.03, 0.01). The nsNIMV group had fewer males than in the NCPAP group (8/24 vs. 17/24, p = 0.01). Reintubation was similar in both groups but atelectasis and sepsis were statistically significant risk factor for reintubation in NCPAP group. There were no significant differences in treatment related complications between the two groups, with respect to incidence of apnea (41.7% in nsNIMV vs. 62.5% in NCPAP), abdominal distensions (8.3% in nsNIMVvs. 16.7% in NCPAP), NEC (4.2% in nsNIMVvs. 12.5 in NCPAP), sepsis (4.2% in nsNIMVvs. 8.3% NCPAP). No GI perforation was observed in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Non-invasive mode of ventilation, both NIMV and NCPAP, for weaning ofpre-term infants from ventilator may reduce the rate of reintubation in this group. Both modes seem to be equally safe. We believe that the use of non-invasive ventilator techniques will significantly reduce neonatal morbidity in the future. Additional prospective evaluation of these approaches should be conducted in the future.

摘要

目的

比较拔管后7天内的再次插管率,并研究在拔管后即刻随机接受无创同步间歇指令通气(nsNIMV)或鼻塞持续气道正压通气(NCPAP)的早产儿的并发症。

材料与方法

本研究于2006年6月1日至11月30日在诗丽吉王后国家儿童健康研究所新生儿科进行。纳入胎龄≤34周或出生体重≤1500克、准备在4周龄前拔管的插管早产儿。婴儿在拔管后随机分为nsNIMV组或NCPAP组。非同步NIMV设置与拔管前的呼吸机设置相同,NCPAP压力设置为拔管前呼吸机平均气道压相同的值。在静脉注射负荷剂量氨茶碱后进行拔管。主要结局指标是初次拔管后7天内的再次插管情况,次要结局是可能的并发症,如呼吸暂停、腹胀、胃肠道穿孔、坏死性小肠结肠炎(NEC)、败血症和死亡。

结果

在研究期间,共有70例极低出生体重儿入住新生儿科。共有57例婴儿插管,其中48例婴儿被纳入研究;24例在nsNIMV组,24例在NCPAP组。nsNIMV组婴儿在研究开始时的平均出生体重和体重低于NCPAP组(984.8±218与1067±214,以及1185±219与1205±191,p = 0.003,0.02)。与NCPAP组相比,nsNIMV组呼吸窘迫综合征(RDS)发生率和产前使用类固醇的比例也更高(19/24与12/24,以及17/24与8/24,p = 0.03,0.01)。nsNIMV组男性少于NCPAP组(8/24与17/24,p = 0.01)。两组再次插管情况相似,但肺不张和败血症是NCPAP组再次插管的统计学显著危险因素。两组在治疗相关并发症方面无显著差异,呼吸暂停发生率(nsNIMV组为41.7%,NCPAP组为62.5%)、腹胀发生率(nsNIMV组为8.3%,NCPAP组为16.7%)、NEC发生率(nsNIMV组为4.2%,NCPAP组为12.5%)、败血症发生率(nsNIMV组为4.2%,NCPAP组为8.3%)。两组均未观察到胃肠道穿孔。

结论

对于早产儿撤机,无创通气模式,即NIMV和NCPAP,可能会降低该组的再次插管率。两种模式似乎同样安全。我们相信,无创通气技术的使用将在未来显著降低新生儿发病率。未来应进一步对这些方法进行前瞻性评估。

相似文献

1
A randomized trial of non-synchronized Nasopharyngeal Intermittent Mandatory Ventilation (nsNIMV) vs. Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (NCPAP) in the prevention of extubation failure in pre-term < 1,500 grams.一项关于非同步鼻咽间歇性强制通气(nsNIMV)与经鼻持续气道正压通气(NCPAP)预防体重<1500克早产儿拔管失败的随机试验。
J Med Assoc Thai. 2008 Oct;91 Suppl 3:S136-42.
2
Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for preterm neonates after extubation.经气管插管拔管后的早产儿使用经鼻间歇正压通气(NIPPV)与经鼻持续气道正压通气(NCPAP)的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Jul 27;7(7):CD003212. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003212.pub4.
3
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.
4
Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for preterm neonates after extubation.拔管后早产儿使用鼻间歇正压通气(NIPPV)与鼻持续气道正压通气(NCPAP)的比较
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Feb 1;2(2):CD003212. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003212.pub3.
5
Randomized trial of nasal synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation compared with continuous positive airway pressure after extubation of very low birth weight infants.极低出生体重儿拔管后经鼻同步间歇指令通气与持续气道正压通气的随机试验
Pediatrics. 2001 Apr;107(4):638-41. doi: 10.1542/peds.107.4.638.
6
Effectiveness of Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure vs Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation vs Noninvasive High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation as Support After Extubation of Neonates Born Extremely Preterm or With More Severe Respiratory Failure: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.经鼻持续气道正压通气与经鼻间歇正压通气与无创高频振荡通气在极早产儿或更严重呼吸衰竭拔管后支持中的效果比较:一项随机临床试验的二次分析。
JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Jul 3;6(7):e2321644. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.21644.
7
Infant flow biphasic nasal continuous positive airway pressure (BP- NCPAP) vs. infant flow NCPAP for the facilitation of extubation in infants' ≤ 1,250 grams: a randomized controlled trial.≤1250 克婴儿经鼻持续气道正压通气(BP-NCPAP)与婴儿经鼻持续气道正压通气(NCPAP)促进≤1250 克婴儿拔管的随机对照试验。
BMC Pediatr. 2012 Apr 4;12:43. doi: 10.1186/1471-2431-12-43.
8
Noninvasive High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation vs Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure vs Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation as Postextubation Support for Preterm Neonates in China: A Randomized Clinical Trial.经鼻间歇正压通气与经鼻持续正压通气比较非侵入性高频振荡通气作为中国早产儿拔管后支持的随机临床试验。
JAMA Pediatr. 2022 Jun 1;176(6):551-559. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2022.0710.
9
Reintubation rates after extubation to different non-invasive ventilation modes in preterm infants.早产儿拔管后不同无创通气模式下的再插管率。
BMC Pediatr. 2021 Jun 16;21(1):281. doi: 10.1186/s12887-021-02760-7.
10
Unsynchronized nasal intermittent positive pressure versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure in preterm infants after extubation.拔管后早产儿非同步鼻腔间歇性正压通气与鼻腔持续气道正压通气的比较
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014 Jun;27(9):926-9. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2013.846316. Epub 2013 Oct 17.

引用本文的文献

1
Bubble NIPPV: Guidelines for Use.气泡式无创正压通气:使用指南。
Children (Basel). 2025 Jun 25;12(7):834. doi: 10.3390/children12070834.
2
Postextubation use of non-invasive respiratory support in preterm infants: a network meta-analysis.早产儿拔管后无创呼吸支持的应用:一项网状Meta分析
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025 Jul 11;7(7):CD014509. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014509.pub2.
3
Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for preterm neonates after extubation.
经气管插管拔管后的早产儿使用经鼻间歇正压通气(NIPPV)与经鼻持续气道正压通气(NCPAP)的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Jul 27;7(7):CD003212. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003212.pub4.
4
Early nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus early nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for preterm infants.早期经鼻间歇正压通气(NIPPV)与早期经鼻持续气道正压通气(NCPAP)治疗早产儿的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Jul 19;7(7):CD005384. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005384.pub3.
5
Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for preterm neonates after extubation.拔管后早产儿使用鼻间歇正压通气(NIPPV)与鼻持续气道正压通气(NCPAP)的比较
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Feb 1;2(2):CD003212. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003212.pub3.
6
Early nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus early nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for preterm infants.早期经鼻间歇正压通气(NIPPV)与早期经鼻持续气道正压通气(NCPAP)用于早产儿的比较
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Dec 15;12(12):CD005384. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005384.pub2.
7
SNIPPV vs NIPPV: does synchronization matter?经鼻间歇正压通气(NIPPV)与持续气道正压通气(CPAP)治疗新生儿呼吸窘迫综合征的疗效比较:同步性重要吗?
J Perinatol. 2012 Jun;32(6):438-42. doi: 10.1038/jp.2011.117. Epub 2011 Nov 24.