Federal University of Campina Grande Faculty of Medicine, Campina Grande, Brazil.
Division of Neonatal Critical Care, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.
J Perinatol. 2024 Sep;44(9):1276-1284. doi: 10.1038/s41372-024-01947-x. Epub 2024 Mar 29.
To analyze the clinical and physiological outcomes of NIV-NAVA in preterm infants compared with other non-invasive respiratory support.
We conducted a meta-analysis of RCTs and randomized crossover studies comparing NIV-NAVA to other non-invasive strategies in preterm neonates.
NIV-NAVA was superior to other non-invasive support in maximum EAdi (MD - 0.66 µV; 95% CI - 1.17 to -0.15; p = 0.01), asynchrony index (MD - 49.8%; 95% CI - 63.1 to -36.5; p < 0.01), and peak inspiratory pressure (MD - 2.2 cmH2O; 95% CI - 2.7 to -1.7; p < 0.01). However, there were no significant differences in the incidences of intubation (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.56-1.48; p = 0.71), reintubation (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.45-1.16; p = 0.18), or bronchopulmonary dysplasia (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.37-1.60; p = 0.48).
NIV-NAVA was associated with improvements in maximum Edi, asynchrony index, and peak inspiratory pressure relative to other non-invasive respiratory strategies, without significant differences in clinical outcomes between groups.
分析与其他无创性呼吸支持相比,NIV-NAVA 在早产儿中的临床和生理结局。
我们对 RCT 和随机交叉研究进行了荟萃分析,比较了 NIV-NAVA 与早产儿其他无创策略的效果。
与其他无创支持相比,NIV-NAVA 在最大 Edi(MD - 0.66 µV;95% CI -1.17 至 -0.15;p = 0.01)、不同步指数(MD - 49.8%;95% CI -63.1 至 -36.5;p < 0.01)和吸气峰压(MD - 2.2 cmH2O;95% CI -2.7 至 -1.7;p < 0.01)方面均有优势。然而,两组之间在插管率(RR 0.91;95% CI 0.56-1.48;p = 0.71)、再插管率(RR 0.72;95% CI 0.45-1.16;p = 0.18)或支气管肺发育不良(RR 0.77;95% CI 0.37-1.60;p = 0.48)发生率方面无显著差异。
与其他无创性呼吸策略相比,NIV-NAVA 可改善最大 Edi、不同步指数和吸气峰压,但两组之间的临床结局无显著差异。