Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros








Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Iran J Pediatr ; 26(2): e2352, 2016 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27307960

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) is one of the most common diseases in neonates admitted to NICU. For this important cause of morbidity and mortality in preterm neonates, several treatment methods have been used. To date, non-invasive methods are preferred due to fewer complications. OBJECTIVES: Herein, two non-invasive methods of ventilation support are compared: NCPAP vs. NIPPV. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a randomized clinical trial. Premature neonates with less than 34 weeks gestation, suffering from RDS entered the study, including 151 newborns admitted to Vali-Asr NICU during 2012-2013. Most of these patients received surfactant as early rescue via INSURE method and then randomly divided into two NCPAP (73 neonates) and NIPPV (78 neonates) groups. Both early and late complications are compared including extubation failure, hospital length of stay, GI perforation, apnea, intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) and mortality rate. RESULTS: The need for re-intubation was 6% in NIPPV vs. 17.6% in NCPAP group, which was statistically significant (P = 0.031). The length of hospital stay was 23.92 ± 13.5 vs. 32.61 ± 21.07 days in NIPPV and NCPAP groups, respectively (P = 0.002). Chronic lung disease (CLD) was reported to be 4% in NCPAP and 0% in NIPPV groups (P = 0.035). The most common complication occurred in both groups was traumatization of nasal skin and mucosa, all of which fully recovered. Gastrointestinal perforation was not reported in either group. CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals the hospital length of stay, re-intubation and BPD rates are significantly declined in neonates receiving NIPPV as the treatment for RDS.

2.
Acta Med Iran ; 52(8): 596-600, 2014.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25149882

RESUMO

Administration of endotracheal surfactant is potentially the main treatment for neonates suffering from RDS (Respiratory Distress Syndrome), which is followed by mechanical ventilation. Late and severe complications may develop as a consequence of using mechanical ventilation. In this study, conventional methods for treatment of RDS are compared with surfactant administration, use of mechanical ventilation for a brief period and NCPAP (Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure), (INSURE method ((Intubation, Surfactant administration and extubation)). A randomized clinical trial study was performed, including all newborn infants with diagnosed RDS and a gestational age of 35 weeks or less, who were admitted in NICU of Valiasr hospital. The patients were then divided randomly into two CMV (Conventional Mechanical Ventilation) and INSURE groups. Surfactant administration and consequent long-term mechanical ventilation were done in the first group (CMV group). In the second group (INSURE group), surfactant was administered followed by a short-term period of mechanical ventilation. The infants were then extubated, and NCPAP was embedded. The comparison included crucial duration of mechanical ventilation and oxygen therapy, IVH (Intraventricular Hemorrhage), PDA (Patent Ductus Arteriosus), air-leak syndromes, BPD (Broncho-Pulmonary Dysplasia) and mortality rate. The need for mechanical ventilation in 5th day of admission was 43% decreased (P=0.005) in INSURE group in comparison to CMV group. A decline (P=0.01) in the incidence of IVH and PDA was also achieved. Pneumothorax, chronic pulmonary disease and mortality rates, were not significantly different among two groups. (P=0.25, P=0.14, P=0.25, respectively). This study indicated that INSURE method in the treatment of RDS decreases the need for mechanical ventilation and oxygen-therapy in preterm neonates. Moreover, relevant complications as IVH and PDA were observed to be reduced. Thus, it seems rationale to perform this method as the initial treatment for neonates with mild to moderate RDS.


Assuntos
Surfactantes Pulmonares/administração & dosagem , Respiração Artificial/métodos , Síndrome do Desconforto Respiratório do Recém-Nascido/terapia , Pressão Positiva Contínua nas Vias Aéreas/métodos , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Idade Gestacional , Humanos , Recém-Nascido , Recém-Nascido Prematuro , Pneumopatias/epidemiologia , Masculino , Pneumotórax/epidemiologia
3.
Int Rev Immunol ; 31(5): 379-95, 2012 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23083347

RESUMO

Toll-like receptors (TLRs), a family of surface molecules, are involved in innate immune responses. Recent studies indicated that TLRs play a critical role in inflammatory responses to exogenous and endogenous triggers. This article focuses on probable effects of TLRs in the morbidity of cardiovascular events, e.g., ischemic reperfusion (I/R) injury and atherosclerosis. TLR2 and TLR4 have been shown to have the most fundamental role in promoting cytokine production and subsequent inflammatory damages in these states. Blockade of these receptors may be beneficial in both preventing the occurrence and decreasing the complications in cardiovascular events. However, controversies exist on the certainty of this beneficial effect; therefore, additional studies are needed.


Assuntos
Aterosclerose/prevenção & controle , Insuficiência Cardíaca/prevenção & controle , Fatores Imunológicos/uso terapêutico , Traumatismo por Reperfusão/prevenção & controle , Receptor 2 Toll-Like/imunologia , Receptor 4 Toll-Like/imunologia , Aterosclerose/genética , Aterosclerose/imunologia , Citocinas/biossíntese , Citocinas/imunologia , Regulação da Expressão Gênica/efeitos dos fármacos , Insuficiência Cardíaca/genética , Insuficiência Cardíaca/imunologia , Humanos , Imunidade Inata/efeitos dos fármacos , Fatores Imunológicos/farmacologia , Fator 88 de Diferenciação Mieloide/genética , Fator 88 de Diferenciação Mieloide/imunologia , Traumatismo por Reperfusão/genética , Traumatismo por Reperfusão/imunologia , Transdução de Sinais/efeitos dos fármacos , Receptor 2 Toll-Like/agonistas , Receptor 2 Toll-Like/antagonistas & inibidores , Receptor 2 Toll-Like/genética , Receptor 4 Toll-Like/agonistas , Receptor 4 Toll-Like/antagonistas & inibidores , Receptor 4 Toll-Like/genética
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA