Comparison of neurally adjusted ventilatory assist and synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation in preterm infants after patent ductus arteriosus ligation: a retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the efficacy of neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA) to synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation (SIMV) in preterm infants requiring mechanical ventilation after patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) ligation. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on intubated preterm infants who underwent PDA ligation at our hospital from July 2021 to January 2023. Infants were divided into NAVA or SIMV groups based on the ventilation mode after surgery. RESULTS: Fifty preterm infants were included. During treatment, peak inspiratory pressure (PIP) and mean airway pressure (MAP) were lower with NAVA compared to SIMV (PIP: 19.1 ± 2.9 vs. 22.4 ± 3.6 cmH2O, P < 0.001; MAP: 9.1 ± 1.8 vs. 10.9 ± 2.7 cmH2O, P = 0.002). PaO2 and PaO2/FiO2 were higher with NAVA (PaO2: 94.0 ± 11.7 vs. 84.8 ± 15.8 mmHg, P = 0.031; PaO2/FiO2: 267 [220-322] vs. 232 [186-290] mmHg, P = 0.025). Less sedation was required with NAVA (midazolam: 1.5 ± 0.5 vs. 1.1 ± 0.3 µg/kg/min, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Compared to SIMV, early use of NAVA post PDA ligation in preterm infants was associated with decreased PIP and MAP. Early NAVA was also associated with reduced sedation needs and improved oxygenation. However, further studies are warranted to quantify the benefits of NAVA ventilation.

The Diaphragmatic Initiated Ventilatory Assist (DIVA) trial: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial comparing rates of extubation failure in extremely premature infants undergoing extubation to non-invasive neurally adjusted ventilatory assist versus non-synchronized nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation.

BACKGROUND: Invasive mechanical ventilation contributes to bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), the most common complication of prematurity and the leading respiratory cause of childhood morbidity. Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) may limit invasive ventilation exposure and can be either synchronized or non-synchronized (NS). Pooled data suggest synchronized forms may be superior. Non-invasive neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NIV-NAVA) delivers NIV synchronized to the neural signal for breathing, which is detected with a specialized catheter. The DIVA (Diaphragmatic Initiated Ventilatory Assist) trial aims to determine in infants born 240/7-276/7 weeks' gestation undergoing extubation whether NIV-NAVA compared to non-synchronized nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NS-NIPPV) reduces the incidence of extubation failure within 5 days of extubation. METHODS: This is a prospective, unblinded, pragmatic, multicenter phase III randomized clinical trial. Inclusion criteria are preterm infants 24-276/7 weeks gestational age who were intubated within the first 7 days of life for at least 12 h and are undergoing extubation in the first 28 postnatal days. All sites will enter an initial run-in phase, where all infants are allocated to NIV-NAVA, and an independent technical committee assesses site performance. Subsequently, all enrolled infants are randomized to NIV-NAVA or NS-NIPPV at extubation. The primary outcome is extubation failure within 5 days of extubation, defined as any of the following: (1) rise in FiO2 at least 20% from pre-extubation for > 2 h, (2) pH ≤ 7.20 or pCO2 ≥ 70 mmHg; (3) > 1 apnea requiring positive pressure ventilation (PPV) or ≥ 6 apneas requiring stimulation within 6 h; (4) emergent intubation for cardiovascular instability or surgery. Our sample size of 478 provides 90% power to detect a 15% absolute reduction in the primary outcome. Enrolled infants will be followed for safety and secondary outcomes through 36 weeks' postmenstrual age, discharge, death, or transfer. DISCUSSION: The DIVA trial is the first large multicenter trial designed to assess the impact of NIV-NAVA on relevant clinical outcomes for preterm infants. The DIVA trial design incorporates input from clinical NAVA experts and includes innovative features, such as a run-in phase, to ensure consistent technical performance across sites. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov , trial identifier NCT05446272 , registered July 6, 2022.

CPAP Versus NIPPV Postextubation in Preterm Neonates: A Comparative-Effectiveness Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) has been shown to be superior to nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) postextubation in preterm neonates. However, studies have not permitted high CPAP pressures or rescue with other modes. We hypothesized that if CPAP pressures >8 cmH2O and rescue with other modes were permitted, CPAP would be noninferior to NIPPV. METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, comparative-effectiveness, noninferiority study utilizing network-based real-world data from 22 Canadian NICUs. Centers self-selected CPAP or NIPPV as their standard postextubation mode for preterm neonates <29 weeks' gestation. The primary outcome was failure of the initial mode ≤72 hours. Secondary outcomes included failure ≤7 days, and reintubation ≤72 hours and ≤7 days. Groups were compared using a noninferiority adjusted risk-difference (aRD) margin of 0.05, and margin of no difference. RESULTS: A total of 843 infants extubated to CPAP and 974 extubated to NIPPV were included. CPAP was not noninferior (and inferior) to NIPPV for failure of the initial mode ≤72 hours (33.0% vs 26.3%; aRD 0.07 [0.03 to 0.12], Pnoninferiority(NI) = .86), and ≤7 days (40.7% vs 35.8%; aRD 0.09 [0.05 to 0.13], PNI = 0.97). However, CPAP was noninferior (and equivalent) to NIPPV for reintubation ≤72 hours (13.2% vs 16.1%; aRD 0.01 [-0.05 to 0.02], PNI < .01), and noninferior (and superior) for reintubation ≤7 days (16.4% vs 22.8%; aRD -0.04 [-0.07 to -0.001], PNI < .01). CONCLUSIONS: CPAP was not noninferior to NIPPV for failure ≤72 hours postextubation; however, it was noninferior to NIPPV for reintubation ≤72 hours and ≤7 days. This suggests CPAP may be a reasonable initial postextubation mode if alternate rescue strategies are available.

Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation during less invasive surfactant administration in preterm infants: An open-label randomized controlled study.

INTRODUCTION: Approximately half of very preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) fail treatment with nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) and need mechanical ventilation (MV). OBJECTIVES: Our aim with this study was to evaluate if nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) during less invasive surfactant treatment (LISA) can improve respiratory outcome compared with NCPAP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We carried out an open-label randomized controlled trial at tertiary neonatal intensive care units in which infants with RDS born at 25+0-31+6 weeks of gestation between December 1, 2020 and October 31, 2022 were supported with NCPAP before and after surfactant administration and received NIPPV or NCPAP during LISA. The primary endpoint was the need for a second dose of surfactant or MV in the first 72 h of life. Other endpoints were need and duration of invasive and noninvasive respiratory supports, changes in SpO2/FiO2 ratio after LISA, and adverse effect rate. RESULTS: We enrolled 101 infants in the NIPPV group and 99 in the NCPAP group. The unadjusted odds ratio for the composite primary outcome was 0.873 (95% confidence interval: 0.456-1.671; p = .681). We found that the SpO2/FiO2 ratio was transiently higher in the LISA plus NIPPV than in the LISA plus NCPAP group, while adverse effects of LISA had similar occurrence in the two arms. CONCLUSIONS: The application of NIPPV or NCPAP during LISA in very preterm infants supported with NCPAP before and after surfactant administration had similar effects on the short-term respiratory outcome and are both safe. Our study does not support the use of NIPPV during LISA.

Nocturnal Pressure Controlled Ventilation Improves Sleep Efficiency in Patients Receiving Mechanical Ventilation.

BACKGROUND: Patients receiving mechanical ventilation commonly experience sleep fragmentation. The present meta-analysis compared the effects of pressure controlled ventilation (PCV) and pressure support ventilation (PSV) on sleep quality. METHODS: We conducted a search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for studies published before November 2023. In this meta-analysis, individual effect sizes were standardized, and the pooled effect size was determined by using random-effects models. The primary outcome was sleep efficiency. The secondary outcomes were wakefulness, percentages of REM (rapid eye movement) sleep and stages 3 and 4 non-REM sleep, the fragmentation index, and the incidence of apneic events. RESULTS: This meta-analysis examined 4 trials that involved 67 subjects. Sleep efficiency was significantly higher in the PCV group than in the PSV group (mean difference 15.57%, 95% CI 8.54%-22.59%). Wakefulness was significantly lower in the PCV group than in the PSV group (mean difference -18.67%, 95% CI -30.29% to -7.04%). The percentage of REM sleep was significantly higher in the PCV group than in the PSV group (mean difference 2.32%, 95% CI 0.20%-4.45%). Among the subjects with a tendency to develop sleep apnea, the fragmentation index was significantly lower in those receiving PCV than PSV (mean difference -40.00%, 95% CI -51.12% to -28.88%). The incidence of apneic events was significantly lower in the PCV group than in the PSV group (risk ratio 0.06, 95% CI 0.01-0.45). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with PSV, PCV may improve sleep quality in patients receiving nocturnal mechanical ventilation.

Newborn resuscitation timelines: Accurately capturing treatment in the delivery room.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the use of newborn resuscitation timelines to assess the incidence, sequence, timing, duration of and response to resuscitative interventions. METHODS: A population-based observational study conducted June 2019-November 2021 at Stavanger University Hospital, Norway. Parents consented to participation antenatally. Newborns ≥28 weeks' gestation receiving positive pressure ventilation (PPV) at birth were enrolled. Time of birth was registered. Dry-electrode electrocardiogram was applied as soon as possible after birth and used to measure heart rate continuously during resuscitation. Newborn resuscitation timelines were generated from analysis of video recordings. RESULTS: Of 7466 newborns ≥28 weeks' gestation, 289 (3.9%) received PPV. Of these, 182 had the resuscitation captured on video, and were included. Two-thirds were apnoeic, and one-third were breathing ineffectively at the commencement of PPV. PPV was started at median (quartiles) 72 (44, 141) seconds after birth and continued for 135 (68, 236) seconds. The ventilation fraction, defined as the proportion of time from first to last inflation during which PPV was provided, was 85%. Interruption in ventilation was most frequently caused by mask repositioning and auscultation. Suctioning was performed in 35% of newborns, in 95% of cases after the initiation of PPV. PPV was commenced within 60 s of birth in 49% of apnoeic and 12% of ineffectively breathing newborns, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Newborn resuscitation timelines can graphically present accurate, time-sensitive and complex data from resuscitations synchronised in time. Timelines can be used to enhance understanding of resuscitation events in data-guided quality improvement initiatives.

A clinical study evaluating the combination of LISA and SNIPPV for the treatment of respiratory distress syndrome in preterm infants.

To compare the therapeutic effect of less invasive surfactant administration (LISA) followed by synchronized nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (SNIPPV) and traditional intubate-Surfactant-Extubate (InSurE) strategy for the treatment of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (NRDS). A single-center, non-randomized and single- blinded study Tertiary neonatal intensive care unit 89 infants enrolled were preterm with gestational age < 366/7 weeks and clinically diagnosed with neonatal RDS (NRDS) Interventions: 32 infants were assigned to the LISA + SNIPPV group and 57 infants to the InSurE + nCPAP group. No statistically significant differences were noted in the baseline characteristics of the enrolled infants. A lower proportion of infants developed BPD in the LISA + SNIPPV group compared to the InSurE + CPAP group [10 (31.25%) vs. 21 (36.84%), P > 0.05]; however, there was no statistically significant difference. The number needed to treat (NNT) with LISA + SNIPPV to prevent BPD development is 18. The mortality rate was not significant between our study arms [1 (3.13%) vs 2 (3.51%), P > 0.05]. There were no statistically significant differences in the durations (days) of MV [(12.18 ± 13.89) vs. (11.35 ± 11.61), P > 0.05], oxygen therapy [(35.03 ± 19.13) vs. (39.75 ± 17.91), P > 0.05] and re-intubation rates [(0.19 ± 0.40) vs. (0.21 ± 0.45), P > 0.05] between the two study groups. In terms of complications, the incidence of patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) [24 (75.00%) vs. 27 (47.37%), P < 0.05] was higher and a lower rate of disturbed liver function [1 (3.23%) vs. 19 (33.33%), P < 0.05] were observed in the LISA + SNIPPV group. Acid-base imbalances were reportedly significantly higher in the InSurE group (P < 0.05). No significant differences in other complications were noted. In the interventional group, FiO2 requirements were significantly lower up until the 3rd week of treatment [FiO2 at day 0, (30.75 ± 4.78) vs. (34.66 ± 9.83), P < 0.05; FiO2 at day 21, (25.32 ± 3.74) vs. (29.11 ± 8.17), P < 0.05], as was RSS on days 2 [(0.77 ± 0.38) vs. (1.94 ± 0.75), P < 0.05] and 3 [(0.66 ± 0.33) vs. (1.89 ± 0.82), P < 0.05] after treatment. Additionally, infants in the standard group had a significantly prolonged hospital stay (days) [(45.97 ± 16.93) vs. (54.40 ± 16.26), P < 0.05]. The combination of LISA and SNIPPV for NRDS can potentially lower the rate of BPD, FiO2 demand and shorten the length of hospitalization.

[Interpretation of 2023 American Heart Association and American Academy of Pediatrics focused update on neonatal resuscitation guidelines]. / 2023美国心脏协会与美国儿科学会新生儿复苏指南要点更新解读.

In November 2023, the American Heart Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics jointly released key updates to the neonatal resuscitation guidelines based on new clinical evidence. This update serves as an important supplement to the "Neonatal resuscitation: 2020 American Heart Association guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care". The aim of this paper is to outline the key updates and provide guidance on umbilical cord management and the selection of positive pressure ventilation equipment and its additional interfaces in neonatal resuscitation.

Noninvasive Ventilation.

Systematic Reviews and Randomized clinical trials have shown that the use of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) compared to invasive mechanical ventilation reduces the risk of bronchopulmonary dysplasia and or mortality. Most commonly used NIV modes include nasal continuous positive airway pressure, bi-phasic modes, such as, bi-level positive airway pressure, nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation, high flow nasal cannula, noninvasive neurally adjusted ventilatory assist, and nasal high frequency ventilation are discussed in this review.

PCV-VG combined individualized PEEP determination in one-lung ventilated patients with PEEP step change direction: A randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The efficacy of pressure-controlled volume-guaranteed ventilation (PCV-VG) combined with a gradient-directional change in positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) during one-lung ventilation (OLV) in patients who underwent thoracoscopic surgery was investigated. METHODS: Ninety patients were randomly divided into the PC (PCV-VG + 5 cm H2 O fixed PEEP), PI (PCV-VG + incremental PEEP titration), and PD (PCV-VG + decremental PEEP titration) groups. Hemodynamic (heart rate [HR] and mean arterial pressure [MAP]), respiratory mechanics (Ppeak , Pmean, and Cdyn), and arterial blood gas (pH, PaCO2 , PaO2 , and PaO2 /FiO2 ) indices were evaluated at T1 (10 min of two-lung ventilation [TLV]), T2 (10 min of OLV), and T3 (10 min of recovery, TLV). Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was performed to detect neutrophil elastase (NE), clara cell secretory protein (CC16), and interleukin-8 (IL-8) levels at T1 and T3. RESULTS: At T2 and T3 , Ppeak was lower in the PI and PD groups than in the PC group, while Pmean and Cdyn were higher than in the PC group. Ppeak in the PD group was lower than that in the PI group; however, Pmean was higher at T2 and T3 (P < 0.05). At T2 , PaO2 and PaO2 /FiO2 were higher, but PaO2 /FiO2 and VD /VT were lower in the PD and PI groups than in the PC group (P < 0.05). NE, CC16, IL-6, and IL-8 levels were elevated in all three groups at T3 , but the PI and PD groups had lower levels than the PC group (P < 0.05). The incidences of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) and surgical intensive care unit hospitalizations in the PD and PI groups were much lower. CONCLUSION: Gradient-directed altered PEEP titration could improve respiratory mechanics, arterial blood gases, and inflammatory responses and reduce the incidence of PPCs in patients undergoing thoracoscopic surgery.

Tidal volume delivery during nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation: infant cannula vs. nasal continuous positive airway pressure prongs.

OBJECTIVE: To measure tidal volume delivery during nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation with two nasal interfaces: infant cannula and nasal prongs. STUDY DESIGN: A single-center crossover study of neonates with mild respiratory distress. Fifteen preterm neonates were randomized to initial interface of infant cannula or nasal prongs and monitored on a sequence of pressure settings first on the initial interface, then repeated on the alternate interface. We compared relative tidal volumes between the two interfaces with two-way repeated measures ANOVA during three breath types: synchronized (I), patient effort without ventilator breaths (II), and ventilator breaths without patient effort (III). Clinical trial #NCT04326270. RESULTS: Type III breaths delivered no significant tidal volume. No significant difference was measured in relative tidal volume delivery between the interfaces when breath types were matched. CONCLUSIONS: Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation delivers neither clinically nor statistically significant tidal volume with either infant cannula or nasal prongs.

Improving rates of successful extubation: Medications.

This chapter focuses on the pharmacological management of newborn infants in the peri-extubation period to reduce the risk of re-intubation and prolonged mechanical ventilation. Drugs used to promote respiratory drive, reduce the risk of apnoea, reduce lung inflammation and avoid bronchospasm are critically assessed. When available, Cochrane reviews and randomised trials are used as the primary sources of evidence. Methylxanthines, particularly caffeine, are well studied and there is accumulating evidence to guide clinicians on the timing and dosage that may be used. Efficacy and safety for doxapram, steroids, adrenaline and salbutamol are summarised. Management of term infants, extubation following surgery, accidental and complicated extubation and the use of cuffed endotracheal tubes are presented. Overall, caffeine is the only drug with a substantial evidence base, proven to increase the likelihood of successful extubation in preterm infants; no drugs are needed to facilitate extubation in most term infants. Future studies might further define the role of caffeine in late preterm infants and evaluate medications for post-extubation stridor, bronchospasm or apnoea not responsive to methylxanthines.

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) vs continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) vs nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation as primary respiratory support in infants of ≥ 32 weeks gestational age (GA): study protocol for a three-arm multi-center randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Health problems in neonates with gestational age (GA) ≥ 32 weeks remain a major medical concern. Respiratory distress (RD) is one of the common reasons for admission of neonates with GA ≥ 32 weeks. Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) represents a crucial approach to treat RD, and currently, the most used NIV modes in neonatal intensive care unit include high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC), continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), and nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation. Although extensive evidence supports the use of NIPPV in neonates with a GA < 32 weeks, limited data exist regarding its effectiveness in neonates with GA ≥ 32 weeks. Therefore, the aim of this study is to compare the clinical efficacy of HFNC, CPAP, and NIPPV as primary NIV in neonates with GA ≥ 32 weeks who experience RD. METHODS: This trial is designed as an assessor-blinded, three-arm, multi-center, parallel, randomized controlled trial, conducted in neonates ≥ 32 weeks' GA requiring primary NIV in the first 24 h of life. The neonates will be randomly assigned to one of three groups: HFNC, CPAP or NIPPV group. The effectiveness, safety and comfort of NIV will be evaluated. The primary outcome is the occurrence of treatment failure within 72 h after enrollment. Secondary outcomes include death before discharge, surfactant treatment within 72 h after randomization, duration of both noninvasive and invasive mechanical ventilation, duration of oxygen therapy, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, time to achieve full enteral nutrition, necrotizing enterocolitis, duration of admission, cost of admission, air leak syndrome, nasal trauma, and comfort score. DISCUSSION: Currently, there is a paucity of data regarding the utilization of NIPPV in neonates with GA ≥ 32 weeks. This study will provide clinical evidence for the development of respiratory treatment strategies in neonates at GA ≥ 32 weeks with RD, with the aim of minimizing the incidence of tracheal intubation and reducing the complications associated with NIV. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2300069192. Registered on March 9, 2023, https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=171491 .

Nasal interfaces for neonatal resuscitation.

BACKGROUND: The Neonatal Task Force of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) makes practice recommendations for the care of newborn infants in the delivery room (DR). ILCOR recommends that all infants who are gasping, apnoeic, or bradycardic (heart rate < 100 per minute) should be given positive pressure ventilation (PPV) with a manual ventilation device (T-piece, self-inflating bag, or flow-inflating bag) via an interface. The most commonly used interface is a face mask that encircles the infant's nose and mouth. However, gas leak and airway obstruction are common during face mask PPV. Nasal interfaces (single and binasal prongs (long or short), or nasal masks) and laryngeal mask airways (LMAs) may also be used to deliver PPV to newborns in the DR, and may be more effective than face masks. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether newborn infants receiving PPV in the delivery room with a nasal interface compared to a face mask, laryngeal mask airway (LMA), or another type of nasal interface have reduced mortality and morbidity. To assess whether safety and efficacy of the nasal interface differs according to gestational age or ventilation device. SEARCH METHODS: Searches were conducted in September 2022 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Epistemonikos, and two trial registries. We searched conference abstracts and checked the reference lists of included trials and related systematic reviews identified through the search. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCT's that compared the use of nasal interfaces to other interfaces (face masks, LMAs, or one nasal interface to another) to deliver PPV to newborn infants in the DR. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Each review author independently evaluated the search results against the selection criteria, screened retrieved records, extracted data, and appraised the risk of bias. If they were study authors, they did not participate in the selection, risk of bias assessment, or data extraction related to the study. In such instances, the study was independently assessed by other review authors. We contacted trial investigators to obtain additional information. We completed data analysis according to the standards of Cochrane Neonatal, using risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence Intervals (CI) to measure the effect of the different interfaces. We used fixed-effect models and the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included five trials, in which 1406 infants participated. They were conducted in 13 neonatal centres across Europe and Australia. Each of these trials compared a nasal interface to a face mask for the delivery of respiratory support to newborn infants in the DR. Potential sources of bias were a lack of blinding to treatment allocation of the caregivers and investigators in all trials. The evidence suggests that resuscitation with a nasal interface in the DR, compared with a face mask, may have little to no effect on reducing death before discharge (typical risk ratio (RR) 0.72, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.13; 3 studies, 1124 infants; low-certainty evidence). Resuscitation with a nasal interface may reduce the rate of intubation in the DR, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.85; 5 studies, 1406 infants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain for the rate of intubation within 24 hours of birth (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.09; 3 studies, 749 infants; very low-certainty evidence), endotracheal intubation outside the DR during hospitalisation (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.42; 1 study, 144 infants; very low-certainty evidence) and cranial ultrasound abnormalities (intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH) grade ≥ 3, or periventricular leukomalacia; RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.61; 3 studies, 749 infants; very low-certainty evidence). Resuscitation with a nasal interface in the DR, compared with a face mask, may have little to no effect on the incidence of air leaks (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.09; 2 studies, 507 infants; low-certainty evidence), or the need for supplemental oxygen at 36 weeks' corrected gestational age (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.8 to 1.40; 2 studies, 507 infants; low-certainty evidence). We identified one ongoing study, which compares a nasal mask to a face mask to deliver PPV to infants in the DR. We did not identify any completed trials that compared nasal interfaces to LMAs or one nasal interface to another. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Nasal interfaces were found to offer comparable efficacy to face masks (low- to very low-certainty evidence), supporting resuscitation guidelines that state that nasal interfaces are a comparable alternative to face masks for providing respiratory support in the DR. Resuscitation with a nasal interface may reduce the rate of intubation in the DR when compared with a face mask. However, the evidence is very uncertain. This uncertainty is attributed to the use of a new ventilation system in the nasal interface group in two of the five trials. As such, it is not possible to differentiate separate, specific effects related to the ventilation device or to the interface in these studies.

Nonsynchronized nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation versus continuous positive airway pressure as a primary mode of respiratory support in neonates (26-40 weeks) admitted in a tertiary care center: A randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is a standard respiratory care for neonates for last few decades but it too has a high failure rate. Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) is proven to be superior to CPAP in maintaining higher mean airway pressure in neonates with Respiratory Distress Syndrome. The main objective of this study was to compare failure within 72 h of initiation of primary respiratory support between nonsynchronized NIPPV and CPAP in all causes of respiratory distress in newborn infants. Secondarily feed intolerance, Necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC > stage II), hemodynamically significant patent ductus arteriosus, intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH > gradeIII), retinopathy of prematurity (ROP), bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), duration of support and mortality were also compared. METHODS: This was a single center randomized controlled trial. Stratified randomization was done for 216 neonates, based on the gestational age in two subgroups 26-33 weeks and 34-40 weeks whopresented with respiratory distress within 5 days of birth, to receive either NIPPV or CPAP. Primary and secondary outcomes were documented. RESULTS: Statisticalsignificant difference was noted for primary outcome (RR 0.48 [confidence interval = 0.301-0.786], p = 0.003) but not for other secondary outcomes. NIPPV appeared superior in respect to noninvasiveventilation days, BPD occurrence and hospitalization duration. CONCLUSION: As a primary mode, nonsynchronized NIPPV was more efficacious than CPAP in preventing intubation within 72 h of initiation of respiratory support. Further multicenter studies are warranted to explore the benefits of this respiratory support.