Department of Neonatology, Fernandez Hospital, Hyderabad, India.
Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, 160012, India.
Eur J Pediatr. 2017 Dec;176(12):1629-1635. doi: 10.1007/s00431-017-3016-7. Epub 2017 Sep 15.
Nasal injuries with use of nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) range from blanching of nasal tip to septal necrosis and septal drop. This analysis was done in preterm neonates of < 34-week gestation, who received nasal CPAP as primary support as part of a randomized trial comparing Jet device with Bubble device for delivery of CPAP, both through nasal prongs of different structure, make and fixation methods. Nasal injury was assessed using a validated nasal injury score. Out of 170 neonates enrolled, 103 (61%) had nasal injuries; moderate and severe injuries were observed in 18 (11%) and 8 (5%) infants, respectively. Septum was the most common site injured. The incidence and severity of nasal injury were significantly lesser in Jet group compared to Bubble group [RR 0.6 (95% C.I. 0.5-0.8); p < 0.001]. Similarly, neonates in Jet group had lesser average [median (IQR): 3 (3,4) vs. 4 [8, 14]; p = 0.04] as well as peak N-PASS pain scores [median (IQR): 4 [8, 14] vs. 5 [13, 16]; p = 0.01] in comparison to Bubble group. However, Jet group neonates had significantly more common prong displacements.
Bubble CPAP device with its nasal interface had higher and more serious incidence of nasal injuries in comparison to Jet CPAP device. What is known: • Nasal injuries are becoming increasingly common with use of nasal CPAP low gestational age, low birth weight, longer use of CPAP and longer NICU stay are risk factors for such injuries • Validated nasal injury scores have been created for assessment of nasal trauma in neonates What is new: • Bubble device with its interface had higher and more serious incidence of nasal injuries in comparison to Jet device • Even though pain assessed by N-PASS was less with Jet device, prong displacements were more frequent with its system.
目的:研究使用经鼻持续气道正压通气(CPAP)治疗早产儿时,鼻塞与设备类型的相关性。
设计:前瞻性随机临床试验。
地点:意大利米兰大学医院新生儿重症监护病房。
对象:胎龄<34 周的早产儿,需要 CPAP 作为初始治疗。
干预措施:随机分配至使用 Jet 鼻塞(Fisher & Paykel 公司)或 Bubble 鼻塞(Aeroflow 公司)进行 CPAP 治疗。
主要结局测量指标:N-PASS 疼痛评分、鼻塞相关损伤评分(0-5 分,分值越高表示损伤越严重)。
结果:共纳入 170 例患儿,其中 103 例(61%)发生了鼻塞损伤,18 例(11%)和 8 例(5%)患儿的损伤程度为中重度。Jet 组患儿的鼻塞损伤发生率和严重程度显著低于 Bubble 组(RR 0.6,95%CI 0.5-0.8;P<0.001)。Jet 组患儿的平均(中位数[四分位数范围])和峰值 N-PASS 疼痛评分[中位数(四分位数范围)]也显著低于 Bubble 组[4 分(3,4)比 4 分[8,14];P=0.04 和 4 分[8,14]比 5 分[13,16];P=0.01]。然而,Jet 组患儿的鼻塞更容易移位。
结论:与 Jet 鼻塞相比,Bubble 鼻塞导致的鼻塞损伤发生率更高,程度更严重。