Suppr超能文献

用于早产儿无创呼吸支持的长而窄管鼻导管:系统评价与荟萃分析

Nasal Cannula with Long and Narrow Tubing for Non-Invasive Respiratory Support in Preterm Neonates: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

作者信息

Anand Pratima, Kaushal Monika, Ramaswamy Viraraghavan Vadakkencherry, Pullattayil S Abdul Kareem, Razak Abdul, Trevisanuto Daniele

机构信息

Division of Neonatology, Department of Paediatrics, Vardhman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi 110029, India.

Department of Neonatology, Emirates Speciality Hospital, Dubai P.O. Box 505240, United Arab Emirates.

出版信息

Children (Basel). 2022 Sep 23;9(10):1461. doi: 10.3390/children9101461.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Cannulas with long and narrow tubing (CLNT) are increasingly being used as an interface for noninvasive respiratory support (NRS) in preterm neonates; however, their efficacy compared to commonly used nasal interfaces such as short binasal prongs (SBP) and nasal masks (NM) has not been widely studied.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, Health Technology Assessment Database, and Web of Science were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies investigating the efficacy of CLNT compared to SBP or NM in preterm neonates requiring NRS for primary respiratory and post-extubation support. A random-effects meta-analysis was used for data synthesis.

RESULTS

Three RCTs and three observational studies were included. Clinical benefit or harm could not be ruled out for the outcome of need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) for CLNT versus SBP or NM [relative risk (RR) 1.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-3.04, certainty of evidence (CoE) low]. The results were also inconclusive for the outcome of treatment failure [RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.48-3.01, CoE very low]. Oropharyngeal pressure transmission was possibly lower with CLNT compared to other interfaces [MD -1.84 cm H20, 95% CI -3.12 to -0.56, CoE very low]. Clinical benefit or harm could not be excluded with CLNT compared to SBP or NM for the outcomes of duration of IMV, nasal trauma, receipt of surfactant, air leak, and NRS duration.

CONCLUSION

Very low to low CoE and statistically nonsignificant results for the clinical outcomes precluded us from making any reasonable conclusions; however, the use of CLNT as an NRS interface, compared to SBP or NM, possibly transmits lower oropharyngeal pressures. We suggest adequately powered multicentric RCTs to evaluate the efficacy of CLNT when compared to other interfaces.

摘要

背景

带有细长管道的插管(CLNT)越来越多地被用作早产儿无创呼吸支持(NRS)的接口;然而,与常用的鼻接口如短双侧鼻叉(SBP)和鼻面罩(NM)相比,其疗效尚未得到广泛研究。

材料与方法

检索了Medline、Embase、CENTRAL、卫生技术评估数据库和科学网,以查找比较CLNT与SBP或NM在需要NRS进行原发性呼吸和拔管后支持的早产儿中的疗效的随机临床试验(RCT)和观察性研究。采用随机效应荟萃分析进行数据合成。

结果

纳入了三项RCT和三项观察性研究。对于CLNT与SBP或NM相比,有创机械通气(IMV)需求这一结果,不能排除临床获益或危害[相对危险度(RR)1.37,95%置信区间(CI)0.61 - 3.04,证据确定性(CoE)低]。对于治疗失败这一结果,结果也无定论[RR 1.20,95% CI 0.48 - 3.01,CoE极低]。与其他接口相比,CLNT的口咽压力传递可能更低[平均差(MD)-1.84 cm H20,95% CI -3.12至 -0.56,CoE极低]。对于IMV持续时间、鼻外伤、表面活性剂使用、气漏和NRS持续时间等结果,与SBP或NM相比,CLNT不能排除临床获益或危害。

结论

极低到低的CoE以及临床结果在统计学上无显著差异,使我们无法得出任何合理结论;然而与SBP或NM相比,CLNT作为NRS接口可能传递更低的口咽压力。我们建议进行有足够样本量的多中心RCT,以评估CLNT与其他接口相比的疗效。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/735d/9600105/b97fd08ac8e6/children-09-01461-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验