Newborn Services, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Division of Neonatology, Sidra Medical and Research Center, Doha, Qatar.
Pediatr Pulmonol. 2020 Nov;55(11):2940-2963. doi: 10.1002/ppul.25011. Epub 2020 Sep 4.
To compare the efficacy of different noninvasive respiratory support (NRS) modes for primary respiratory support of preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS).
Systematic review and network meta-analysis using the Bayesian random-effects approach. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were searched.
High flow nasal cannula (HFNC), continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), bilevel CPAP (BiPAP), noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV).
Requirement of invasive mechanical ventilation (MV), any treatment failure.
A total of 35 studies including 4078 neonates were included. NIPPV was more effective in decreasing the requirement of MV than CPAP (risk ratios [95% credible interval]: 0.60 [0.44, 0.77]) and HFNC [0.66 (0.43, 0.97)]. Surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) for NIPPV, BiPAP, HFNC, and CPAP were 0.95, 0.59, 0.32, and 0.13. For the outcome of treatment failure, both NIPPV and BiPAP were more efficacious compared to CPAP and HFNC (0.56 [0.44, 0.71] {NIPPV vs CPAP}, 0.69 [0.51, 0.93] {BiPAP vs CPAP}, 0.42 [0.30, 0.63] {NIPPV vs HFNC}, 0.53 [0.35, 0.81] {BiPAP vs HFNC}). The SUCRA for NIPPV, BiPAP, CPAP, and HFNC were 0.96, 0.70, 0.32, and 0.01. NIPPV was associated with a reduced risk of air leak compared to BiPAP and CPAP (0.36 [0.16, 0.73]; 0.54 [0.30, 0.87], respectively). NIPPV resulted in lesser incidence of bronchopulmonary dysplasia or mortality when compared to CPAP (0.74 [0.52, 0.98]). Nasal injury was lesser with HFNC compared to CPAP (0.15 [0.01, 0.60]).
Most effective primary mode of NRS in preterm neonates with RDS was NIPPV.
比较不同无创呼吸支持(NRS)模式对有呼吸窘迫综合征(RDS)的早产儿进行原发性呼吸支持的疗效。
系统评价和网络荟萃分析,采用贝叶斯随机效应方法。检索 MEDLINE、EMBASE 和 CENTRAL。
高流量鼻导管(HFNC)、持续气道正压通气(CPAP)、双水平气道正压通气(BiPAP)、无创正压通气(NIPPV)。
有创机械通气(MV)的需求、任何治疗失败。
共纳入 35 项研究,共 4078 例新生儿。与 CPAP 相比,NIPPV 更有效地降低了 MV 的需求(风险比[95%可信区间]:0.60[0.44,0.77])和 HFNC[0.66(0.43,0.97])。NIPPV、BiPAP、HFNC 和 CPAP 的累积排序曲线下面积(SUCRA)分别为 0.95、0.59、0.32 和 0.13。对于治疗失败的结局,与 CPAP 和 HFNC 相比,NIPPV 和 BiPAP 均更有效(0.56[0.44,0.71] {NIPPV 与 CPAP},0.69[0.51,0.93] {BiPAP 与 CPAP},0.42[0.30,0.63] {NIPPV 与 HFNC},0.53[0.35,0.81] {BiPAP 与 HFNC})。NIPPV、BiPAP、CPAP 和 HFNC 的 SUCRA 分别为 0.96、0.70、0.32 和 0.01。与 BiPAP 和 CPAP 相比,NIPPV 发生气漏的风险降低(0.36[0.16,0.73];0.54[0.30,0.87])。与 CPAP 相比,NIPPV 导致支气管肺发育不良或死亡率降低(0.74[0.52,0.98])。与 CPAP 相比,HFNC 导致的鼻损伤更少(0.15[0.01,0.60])。
对有 RDS 的早产儿进行原发性 NRS 最有效的模式是 NIPPV。