Suppr超能文献

拔管后即刻经鼻持续气道正压通气预防早产儿发病率。

Nasal continuous positive airway pressure immediately after extubation for preventing morbidity in preterm infants.

机构信息

Department of Paediatrics, RCSI & UCD Malaysia Campus (formerly Penang Medical College), George Town, Malaysia.

Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Oct 11;10(10):CD000143. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000143.pub2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Preterm infants who are extubated following a period of invasive ventilation via an endotracheal tube are at risk of developing respiratory failure, leading to reintubation. This may be due to apnoea, respiratory acidosis, or hypoxia. Historically, preterm infants were extubated to head box oxygen or low-flow nasal cannulae. Support with non-invasive pressure might help improve rates of successful extubation in preterm infants by stabilising the upper airway, improving lung function, and reducing apnoea. This is an update of a review first published in 1997 and last updated in 2003.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP), applied immediately after extubation of preterm infants, reduces the incidence of extubation failure and the need for additional ventilatory support, without clinically important adverse events.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and trial registries on 22 September 2023 using a revised strategy. We searched conference abstracts and the reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligible trials employed random or quasi-random allocation of preterm infants undergoing extubation. Eligible comparisons were NCPAP (delivered by any device and interface) versus head box oxygen, extubation to room air, or any other form of low-pressure supplemental oxygen. We grouped the comparators under the term no continuous positive airway pressure (no CPAP).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data from the included studies. Where studies were sufficiently similar, we performed a meta-analysis, calculating risk ratios (RRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous data. For the primary outcomes that showed an effect, we calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB). We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence for clinically important outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine trials (with 726 infants) in the quantitative synthesis of this updated review. Eight studies were conducted in high-income countries between 1982 and 2005. One study was conducted in Chile, which was classified as upper-middle income at the time of the study. All studies used head box oxygen in the control arm. Risk of bias was generally low. However, due to the inherent nature of the intervention, no studies incorporated blinding. Consequently, the neonatal intensive care unit staff were aware of the assigned group for each infant, and we judged all studies at high risk of performance bias. However, we assessed blinding of the outcome assessor (detection bias) as low risk for seven studies because they used objective criteria to define both primary outcomes. NCPAP compared with no CPAP may reduce the risk of extubation failure (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.76; risk difference (RD) -0.17, 95% -0.23 to -0.10; NNTB 6, 95% CI 4 to 10; I = 55%; 9 studies, 726 infants; low-certainty evidence) and endotracheal reintubation (RR 0.79, 95% 0.64 to 0.98; RD -0.07, 95% CI -0.14 to -0.01; NNTB 15, 95% CI 8 to 100; I = 65%; 9 studies; 726 infants; very low-certainty evidence), though the evidence for endotracheal reintubation is very uncertain. NCPAP compared with no CPAP may have little or no effect on bronchopulmonary dysplasia, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.68; RD -0.03, 95% CI -0.22 to 0.15; 1 study, 92 infants; very low-certainty evidence). No study reported neurodevelopmental outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: NCPAP may be more effective than no CPAP in preventing extubation failure in preterm infants if applied immediately after extubation from invasive mechanical ventilation. We are uncertain whether it can reduce the risk of reintubation or bronchopulmonary dysplasia. We have no information on long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes. Although there is only low-certainty evidence for the effectiveness of NCPAP immediately after extubation in preterm infants, we consider there is no need for further research on this intervention, which has become standard practice.

摘要

背景

通过气管内管进行有创通气后拔管的早产儿有发生呼吸衰竭并再次插管的风险。这可能是由于呼吸暂停、呼吸性酸中毒或缺氧引起的。历史上,早产儿被拔管到头箱吸氧或低流量鼻导管。非侵入性压力支持可能有助于通过稳定上呼吸道、改善肺功能和减少呼吸暂停来提高早产儿成功拔管的比率。这是对 1997 年首次发表并于 2003 年更新的综述的更新。

目的

确定在早产儿拔管后立即应用鼻塞持续气道正压通气(NCPAP)是否可以降低拔管失败和需要额外通气支持的发生率,而没有临床重要的不良事件。

检索方法

我们于 2023 年 9 月 22 日使用修订后的策略在 CENTRAL、MEDLINE、Embase 和试验注册库中进行了检索。我们还检索了会议摘要和纳入研究的参考文献列表以及相关的系统评价。

选择标准

合格的试验采用随机或半随机分配方式将接受拔管的早产儿分组。合格的比较是 NCPAP(通过任何设备和接口提供)与头箱吸氧、拔管至室内空气或任何其他形式的低压补充氧气。我们将对照剂归入术语“无持续气道正压通气(no CPAP)”。

数据收集和分析

两名综述作者独立评估了偏倚风险,并从纳入的研究中提取数据。如果研究足够相似,我们进行了荟萃分析,计算了二分类数据的风险比(RR)及其 95%置信区间(CI)。对于显示效果的主要结局,我们计算了额外有益结局的需要治疗数(NNTB)。我们使用 GRADE 方法评估了对临床重要结局的证据的确定性。

主要结果

我们纳入了这篇更新综述的 9 项试验(涉及 726 名婴儿)进行定量综合分析。8 项研究在 1982 年至 2005 年间在高收入国家进行。一项研究在智利进行,当时该国被归类为中高收入国家。所有研究均在对照组中使用头箱吸氧。偏倚风险通常较低。然而,由于干预措施的固有性质,没有研究采用盲法。因此,新生儿重症监护病房的工作人员对每个婴儿的分组都有了解,我们认为所有研究的实施偏倚风险都很高。然而,由于七个研究使用客观标准来定义两个主要结局,因此我们将结局评估者的盲法评估(检测偏倚)判断为低风险。与无 CPAP 相比,NCPAP 可能降低拔管失败的风险(RR 0.62,95%CI 0.51 至 0.76;风险差异(RD)-0.17,95%CI-0.23 至-0.10;NNTB 6,95%CI 4 至 10;I = 55%;9 项研究,726 名婴儿;低确定性证据)和气管内再插管的风险(RR 0.79,95%CI 0.64 至 0.98;RD -0.07,95%CI -0.14 至 -0.01;NNTB 15,95%CI 8 至 100;I = 65%;9 项研究,726 名婴儿;非常低确定性证据),尽管气管内再插管的证据非常不确定。与无 CPAP 相比,NCPAP 可能对支气管肺发育不良几乎没有或没有影响,但证据非常不确定(RR 0.89,95%CI 0.47 至 1.68;RD -0.03,95%CI -0.22 至 0.15;1 项研究,92 名婴儿;非常低确定性证据)。没有研究报告神经发育结局。

作者结论

如果在早产儿从有创机械通气中拔管后立即应用 NCPAP,与无 CPAP 相比,可能更有效地预防拔管失败。我们不确定它是否可以降低再插管或支气管肺发育不良的风险。我们没有关于长期神经发育结局的信息。尽管 NCPAP 对早产儿拔管后立即应用的有效性的证据仅为低确定性,但我们认为没有必要对此干预措施进行进一步研究,因为它已成为标准做法。

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