Children's Hospital, London Health Science Centre, Department of Pediatrics, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Department of Pediatrics, Western University, Children's Health Research Institute, London, Ontario, Canada.
Am J Perinatol. 2023 Aug;40(11):1202-1207. doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1733956. Epub 2021 Sep 24.
Surfactant delivery via a thin endotracheal catheter during spontaneous breathing; a technique called minimally invasive surfactant therapy (MIST) is an alternative to intubation and surfactant administration. Procedural details among different centers vary, with marked differences in the choice of catheter to instill surfactant. Studies report use of feeding catheters, multiaccess suction catheters, vascular catheters, and more recently custom-built catheters for this purpose. The impact of choice of catheter on procedural success and procedural adverse effects has not been reported. Our present study compares the procedural success and adverse effects of MIST using a semirigid vascular catheter (16G Angiocath-Hobart Method) versus a flexible multiaccess catheter (MAC).
This was a retrospective review of prospectively collected data at a tertiary care neonatal intensive care unit in Southwestern Ontario. All neonates who received surfactant via MIST between May 1, 2016 and September 30, 2020 were included in the study. Relevant baseline characteristics and data on procedural details (premedication, type of catheter, etc.) were collected. The procedural success, number of attempts, and adverse effects between neonates who received MIST via MAC and 16G Angiocath was compared by using Chi-square test or Fisher's test as appropriate. A -value of less that 0.05 was considered significant.
A total of 139 neonates received surfactant via MIST method during the study period. Moreover, 93 neonates received the surfactant via MAC, while 46 received it via Angiocath. The baseline demographic characteristics in the two group were similar. A higher proportion of neonates in Angiocath group received Atropine (100 vs. 76%, = 0.002) and Fentanyl (98 vs. 36%, < 0.001) than the MAC group.The procedural success was 91% in the Angiocath group and 89% in the MAC group ( > 0.99). Multiple attempts were needed in 24% of neonates in the Angiocath group and 37% in the MAC group ( = 0.158). More episodes of desaturations were noted in the Angiocath group (89%) than the MAC group (69%; = 0.012). Other rates of common adverse effects were similar between the two groups. On exploratory analysis fentanyl use held significant association with less success, more desaturation, apneic episodes, and need of positive pressure ventilation /intubation.
The overall procedural success of MIST is similar in both catheter groups. The proportion of neonates requiring multiple attempts was lower with the Angiocath, though difference was not statistically significant. Desaturation episodes were seen more frequently in the Angiocath group, which was related to higher use of procedural sedation in this group.
· MIST is emerging as a less invasive method of surfactant delivery that has proven clinical benefits.. · Considerable, procedural variation is reported, particularly regarding choice of catheter.. · Our present study compares the procedural success and adverse effects of MIST using a semirigid vascular catheter (16G Angiocath-Hobart method) versus a flexible MAC.. · High and comparable procedural success was seen in both groups..
在自主呼吸期间通过细的气管内导管输送表面活性剂;一种称为微创表面活性剂治疗(MIST)的技术是替代插管和表面活性剂给药的方法。不同中心之间的程序细节存在差异,在选择注入表面活性剂的导管方面存在明显差异。研究报告使用喂养导管、多通道吸引导管、血管导管,以及最近专门为此目的制造的导管。导管选择对程序成功和程序不良影响的影响尚未报道。我们目前的研究比较了使用半刚性血管导管(16G Angiocath-Hobart 方法)与柔性多通道导管(MAC)的 MIST 的程序成功率和不良影响。
这是安大略省西南部一家三级新生儿重症监护病房前瞻性收集数据的回顾性研究。所有在 2016 年 5 月 1 日至 2020 年 9 月 30 日期间通过 MIST 接受表面活性剂的新生儿均纳入研究。收集了相关的基线特征和程序细节(预用药、导管类型等)的数据。通过适当的卡方检验或 Fisher 检验比较通过 MAC 和 16G Angiocath 接受 MIST 的新生儿的程序成功率、尝试次数和不良影响。小于 0.05 的值被认为具有统计学意义。
在研究期间,共有 139 名新生儿通过 MIST 方法接受了表面活性剂。此外,93 名新生儿通过 MAC 接受了表面活性剂,而 46 名新生儿通过 Angiocath 接受了表面活性剂。两组的基线人口统计学特征相似。Angiocath 组接受阿托品的比例(100%对 76%,=0.002)和芬太尼(98%对 36%,<0.001)高于 MAC 组。Angiocath 组的程序成功率为 91%,MAC 组为 89%(>0.99)。Angiocath 组中有 24%的新生儿需要多次尝试,而 MAC 组中有 37%的新生儿需要多次尝试(=0.158)。Angiocath 组中出现呼吸暂停的比例(89%)高于 MAC 组(69%;=0.012)。两组常见不良影响的其他发生率相似。在探索性分析中,芬太尼的使用与成功率较低、更多的低氧血症、呼吸暂停发作和需要正压通气/插管显著相关。
两种导管组的 MIST 总体程序成功率相似。虽然差异没有统计学意义,但 Angiocath 组需要多次尝试的比例较低。Angiocath 组更频繁地出现低氧血症,这与该组中程序性镇静的使用较高有关。
· MIST 作为一种侵入性较小的表面活性剂输送方法正在兴起,已证明具有临床益处。· 据报道,程序存在相当大的差异,特别是在导管选择方面。· 我们目前的研究比较了使用半刚性血管导管(16G Angiocath-Hobart 方法)与柔性 MAC 进行 MIST 的程序成功率和不良影响。· 两组均取得了较高且相当的程序成功率。