Suppr超能文献

高流量鼻导管与经鼻持续气道正压通气用于呼吸窘迫早产儿的初始呼吸支持:一项随机对照试验

High-Flow Nasal Cannula versus Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure for Primary Respiratory Support in Preterm Infants with Respiratory Distress: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

作者信息

Murki Srinivas, Singh Jayesh, Khant Chiragkumar, Kumar Dash Swarup, Oleti Tejo Pratap, Joy Percy, Kabra Nandkishor S

机构信息

Fernandez Hospital, Hyderabad, India.

Surya Hospital, Mumbai, India.

出版信息

Neonatology. 2018;113(3):235-241. doi: 10.1159/000484400. Epub 2018 Jan 23.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) is the standard noninvasive respiratory support for newborns with respiratory distress. Evidence for high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) as an alternative mode of respiratory support is inconclusive.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this work was to evaluate whether HFNC is not inferior to nCPAP in reducing the need for higher respiratory support in the first 72 h of life when applied as a noninvasive respiratory support mode for preterm neonates with respiratory distress.

METHODS

Preterm infants (gestation ≥28 weeks and birth weight ≥1,000 g) with respiratory distress were randomized to either HFNC or nCPAP in a non-inferiority trial. Failure of the support mode in the first 72 h after birth was the primary outcome. Infants failing HFNC were rescued either with nCPAP or mechanical ventilation, and those failing nCPAP received mechanical ventilation.

RESULTS

During the study period, 139 and 133 infants were randomized to the nCPAP and HFNC groups, respectively. The study was stopped after an interim analysis showed a significant difference (p < 0.001) in the primary outcome between the 2 groups. The treatment failure was significantly higher in the HFNC group (HFNC, n = 35, 26.3%, vs. CPAP, n = 11, 7.9%, risk difference 18.4 percentage points, 95% CI 9.7-27). Among the infants in the HFNC group who had treatment failure (n = 35), 32 were initially rescued with CPAP. The rate of mechanical ventilation in the first 3 and 7 days of life was similar between the 2 groups. Treatment failure was significantly higher in the HFNC group per protocol and also in the subgroups of infants with moderate (Silverman Anderson score, SAS ≤5) or severe respiratory distress (SAS score >5).

CONCLUSIONS

When comparing HFNC to nCPAP as a primary noninvasive respiratory support in preterm infants with respiratory distress, HFNC is inferior to nCPAP in avoiding the need for a higher mode of respiratory support in the first 72 h of life.

摘要

背景

鼻持续气道正压通气(nCPAP)是呼吸窘迫新生儿的标准无创呼吸支持方式。高流量鼻导管吸氧(HFNC)作为一种替代呼吸支持模式的证据尚无定论。

目的

本研究旨在评估对于有呼吸窘迫的早产新生儿,在出生后72小时内作为无创呼吸支持模式应用时,HFNC在减少对更高水平呼吸支持需求方面是否不劣于nCPAP。

方法

在一项非劣效性试验中,将有呼吸窘迫的早产儿(孕周≥28周且出生体重≥1000克)随机分为HFNC组或nCPAP组。出生后72小时内支持模式失败是主要结局。HFNC失败的婴儿用nCPAP或机械通气进行抢救,nCPAP失败的婴儿接受机械通气。

结果

在研究期间,分别有139例和133例婴儿被随机分配到nCPAP组和HFNC组。一项中期分析显示两组主要结局存在显著差异(p<0.001)后,研究停止。HFNC组的治疗失败率显著更高(HFNC组,n = 35,26.3%;CPAP组,n = 11,7.9%,风险差异18.4个百分点,95%CI 9.7 - 27)。在HFNC组中治疗失败的婴儿(n = 35)中,32例最初用CPAP进行了抢救。两组出生后第3天和第7天的机械通气率相似。按方案分析,HFNC组的治疗失败率显著更高,在中度(Silverman Anderson评分,SAS≤5)或重度呼吸窘迫(SAS评分>5)的婴儿亚组中也是如此。

结论

在有呼吸窘迫的早产婴儿中,将HFNC与nCPAP作为主要无创呼吸支持进行比较时,HFNC在出生后72小时内避免对更高水平呼吸支持需求方面劣于nCPAP。

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