Surfactant therapy via thin catheter in preterm infants with or at risk of respiratory distress syndrome

Mohamed E Abdel-Latif, Peter G Davis, Kevin I Wheeler, Antonio G De Paoli, Peter A Dargaville, Mohamed E Abdel-Latif, Peter G Davis, Kevin I Wheeler, Antonio G De Paoli, Peter A Dargaville

Abstract

Background: Non-invasive respiratory support is increasingly used for the management of respiratory dysfunction in preterm infants. This approach runs the risk of under-treating those with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS), for whom surfactant administration is of paramount importance. Several techniques of minimally invasive surfactant therapy have been described. This review focuses on surfactant administration to spontaneously breathing infants via a thin catheter briefly inserted into the trachea.

Objectives: Primary objectives In non-intubated preterm infants with established RDS or at risk of developing RDS to compare surfactant administration via thin catheter with: 1. intubation and surfactant administration through an endotracheal tube (ETT); or 2. continuation of non-invasive respiratory support without surfactant administration or intubation. Secondary objective 1. To compare different methods of surfactant administration via thin catheter Planned subgroup analyses included gestational age, timing of intervention, and use of sedating pre-medication during the intervention.

Search methods: We used the standard search strategy of Cochrane Neonatal to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library; Ovid MEDLINE(R) and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Daily and Versions(R); and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), on 30 September 2020. We also searched clinical trials databases and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised trials.

Selection criteria: We included randomised trials comparing surfactant administration via thin catheter (S-TC) with (1) surfactant administration through an ETT (S-ETT), or (2) continuation of non-invasive respiratory support without surfactant administration or intubation. We also included trials comparing different methods/strategies of surfactant administration via thin catheter. We included preterm infants (at < 37 weeks' gestation) with or at risk of RDS.

Data collection and analysis: Review authors independently assessed study quality and risk of bias and extracted data. Authors of all studies were contacted regarding study design and/or missing or unpublished data. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence.

Main results: We included 16 studies (18 publications; 2164 neonates) in this review. These studies compared surfactant administration via thin catheter with surfactant administration through an ETT with early extubation (Intubate, Surfactant, Extubate technique - InSurE) (12 studies) or with delayed extubation (2 studies), or with continuation of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and rescue surfactant administration at pre-specified criteria (1 study), or compared different strategies of surfactant administration via thin catheter (1 study). Two trials reported neurosensory outcomes of of surviving participants at two years of age. Eight studies were of moderate certainty with low risk of bias, and eight studies were of lower certainty with unclear risk of bias. S-TC versus S-ETT in preterm infants with or at risk of RDS Meta-analyses of 14 studies in which S-TC was compared with S-ETT as a control demonstrated a significant decrease in risk of the composite outcome of death or bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) at 36 weeks' postmenstrual age (risk ratio (RR) 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48 to 0.73; risk difference (RD) -0.11, 95% CI -0.15 to -0.07; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 9, 95% CI 7 to 16; 10 studies; 1324 infants; moderate-certainty evidence); the need for intubation within 72 hours (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.74; RD -0.14, 95% CI -0.18 to -0.09; NNTB 8, 95% CI; 6 to 12; 12 studies, 1422 infants; moderate-certainty evidence); severe intraventricular haemorrhage (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.96; RD -0.04, 95% CI -0.08 to -0.00; NNTB 22, 95% CI 12 to 193; 5 studies, 857 infants; low-certainty evidence); death during first hospitalisation (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.84; RD -0.02, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.06; NNTB 20, 95% CI 12 to 58; 11 studies, 1424 infants; low-certainty evidence); and BPD among survivors (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.74; RD -0.08, 95% CI -0.11 to -0.04; NNTB 13, 95% CI 9 to 24; 11 studies, 1567 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was no significant difference in risk of air leak requiring drainage (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.02; RD -0.03, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.00; 6 studies, 1036 infants; low-certainty evidence). None of the studies reported on the outcome of death or survival with neurosensory disability. Only one trial compared surfactant delivery via thin catheter with continuation of CPAP, and one trial compared different strategies of surfactant delivery via thin catheter, precluding meta-analysis.

Authors' conclusions: Administration of surfactant via thin catheter compared with administration via an ETT is associated with reduced risk of death or BPD, less intubation in the first 72 hours, and reduced incidence of major complications and in-hospital mortality. This procedure had a similar rate of adverse effects as surfactant administration through an ETT. Data suggest that treatment with surfactant via thin catheter may be preferable to surfactant therapy by ETT. Further well-designed studies of adequate size and power, as well as ongoing studies, will help confirm and refine these findings, clarify whether surfactant therapy via thin tracheal catheter provides benefits over continuation of non-invasive respiratory support without surfactant, address uncertainties within important subgroups, and clarify the role of sedation.

Conflict of interest statement

MEA has no interests to declare.

KIW has no interests to declare.

PGD has no interests to declare.

AGDP has no interests to declare.

PAD is the Chief Investigator of the OPTIMIST‐A trial, a multi‐centre RCT of surfactant via tracheal catheterisation in preterm infants on CPAP (ACTRN12611000916943). Chiesi Farmaceutici (Parma, Italy) is providing in‐kind support for this trial by providing surfactant at reduced cost for the OPTIMIST‐A trial. Dr. Dargaville has served as a consultant for Chiesi Farmaceutici and AbbVie Inc. Neither company is involved with the protocol, analysis, manuscript preparation, or publication processes of this review. The Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) has awarded a project grant (#1049114) for conduct of an RCT of minimally invasive surfactant therapy in preterm infants on CPAP, for which PAD is the Chief Investigator.

Copyright © 2021 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Figures

1
1
Study flow diagram.
2
2
Primary and follow‐up studies included in the review categorised by comparison group.
3
3
Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
4
4
Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
5
5
Forest plot of comparison: 1 Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, outcome: 1.1 Death or BPD.
6
6
Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, outcome: 1.1 Death or BPD.
7
7
Forest plot of comparison: 1 Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, outcome: 1.2 Need for intubation within the first 72 hours.
8
8
Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, outcome: 1.2 Need for intubation within the first 72 hours.
9
9
Forest plot of comparison: 1 Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, outcome: 1.3 Air leak requiring drainage.
10
10
Forest plot of comparison: 1 Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, outcome: 1.4 Severe IVH.
11
11
Forest plot of comparison: 1 Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, outcome: 1.5 Death during first hospitalisation.
12
12
Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, outcome: 1.5 Death during first hospitalisation.
13
13
Forest plot of comparison: 1 Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, outcome: 1.6 BPD (clinical definition); in survivors to 36 weeks' PMA.
14
14
Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, outcome: 1.6 BPD (clinical definition); in survivors to 36 weeks' PMA.
1.1. Analysis
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 1: Death or BPD
1.2. Analysis
1.2. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 2: Need for intubation within the first 72 hours
1.3. Analysis
1.3. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 3: Air leak requiring drainage
1.4. Analysis
1.4. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 4: Severe IVH
1.5. Analysis
1.5. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 5: Death during first hospitalisation
1.6. Analysis
1.6. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 6: BPD (clinical definition); in survivors to 36 weeks' PMA
1.7. Analysis
1.7. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 7: Catheter/ETT placement unsuccessful at first attempt
1.8. Analysis
1.8. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 8: Bradycardia (heart rate

1.9. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.9. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 9: Hypoxaemia…

1.9. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 9: Hypoxaemia (oxygen saturation

1.10. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.10. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 10: Need…

1.10. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 10: Need for intubation within the first 72 hours or not intubated but reached failure criteria

1.11. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.11. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 11: Need…

1.11. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 11: Need for intubation at any time

1.12. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.12. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 12: Need…

1.12. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 12: Need for intratracheal surfactant therapy post intervention

1.13. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.13. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 13: Duration…

1.13. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 13: Duration of mechanical ventilation (days; in survivors)

1.14. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.14. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 14: Duration…

1.14. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 14: Duration of any respiratory support (days; in survivors)

1.15. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.15. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 15: Duration…

1.15. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 15: Duration of oxygen therapy (days; in survivors)

1.16. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.16. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 16: Postnatal…

1.16. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 16: Postnatal systemic corticosteroid therapy for BPD mitigation

1.17. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.17. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 17: BPD…

1.17. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 17: BPD (physiological definition)

1.18. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.18. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 18: IVH,…

1.18. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 18: IVH, any grade

1.19. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.19. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 19: Cystic…

1.19. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 19: Cystic PVL

1.20. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.20. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 20: PDA…

1.20. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 20: PDA requiring medical therapy

1.21. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.21. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 21: NEC,…

1.21. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 21: NEC, modified Bell stage ≥2

1.22. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.22. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 22: ROP…

1.22. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 22: ROP stage ≥ 3

1.23. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.23. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 23: Duration…

1.23. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 23: Duration of hospitalisation (days; in survivors)

1.24. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.24. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 24: Discharged…

1.24. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 24: Discharged home with oxygen

2.1. Analysis

Comparison 2: Trials comparing S‐TC…

2.1. Analysis

Comparison 2: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sub‐group analyses, Outcome 1: Death…

2.1. Analysis
Comparison 2: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sub‐group analyses, Outcome 1: Death or BPD

3.1. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC…

3.1. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 1: Death…

3.1. Analysis
Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 1: Death or BPD

3.2. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC…

3.2. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 2: Need…

3.2. Analysis
Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 2: Need for intubation within the first 72 hours

3.3. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC…

3.3. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 3: Air…

3.3. Analysis
Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 3: Air leak requiring drainage

3.4. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC…

3.4. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 4: Severe…

3.4. Analysis
Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 4: Severe IVH

3.5. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC…

3.5. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 5: Death…

3.5. Analysis
Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 5: Death during first hospitalisation

3.6. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC…

3.6. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 6: BPD…

3.6. Analysis
Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 6: BPD (clinical definition); in survivors to 36 weeks' PMA

4.1. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.1. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.1. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 1: Death or BPD

4.2. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.2. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.2. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 2: Incidence of air leak requiring drainage

4.3. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.3. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.3. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 3: Severe IVH

4.4. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.4. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.4. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 4: Death during first hospitalisation

4.5. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.5. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.5. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 5: BPD (clinical definition); in survivors to 36 weeks' PMA

4.6. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.6. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.6. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 6: Catheter/ETT placement unsuccessful at first attempt

4.7. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.7. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.7. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 7: Bradycardia (heart rate

4.8. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.8. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.8. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 8: Need for intubation within the first 72 hours or not intubated but reached failure criteria

4.9. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.9. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.9. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 9: Need for intubation at any time

4.10. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.10. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.10. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 10: Postnatal systemic corticosteroid therapy for BPD mitigation

4.11. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.11. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.11. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 11: Cystic PVL

4.12. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.12. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.12. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 12: ROP ≥ stage 3

4.13. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.13. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.13. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 13: Discharged home with oxygen

4.14. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.14. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.14. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 14: Cerebral palsy by clinical examination or other means

5.1. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.1. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.1. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 1: Air leak

5.2. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.2. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.2. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 2: Severe IVH

5.3. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.3. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.3. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 3: Need for intubation during the procedure

5.4. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.4. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.4. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 4: Need for intubation within the first 24 hours

5.5. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.5. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.5. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 5: Death during first hospitalisation

5.6. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.6. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.6. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 6: Need for positive‐pressure ventilation during the intervention

5.7. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.7. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.7. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 7: Duration of the procedure (seconds)

5.8. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.8. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.8. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 8: Pain score using a validated instrument for measuring discomfort/pain during the procedure (e.g. COMFORTneo score)

5.9. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.9. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.9. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 9: Hypotension requiring treatment
All figures (68)
Update of
  • doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011672
Similar articles
Cited by
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Related information
Full text links [x]
[x]
Cite
Copy Download .nbib
Format: AMA APA MLA NLM

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

Follow NCBI
1.9. Analysis
1.9. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 9: Hypoxaemia (oxygen saturation

1.10. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.10. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 10: Need…

1.10. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 10: Need for intubation within the first 72 hours or not intubated but reached failure criteria

1.11. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.11. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 11: Need…

1.11. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 11: Need for intubation at any time

1.12. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.12. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 12: Need…

1.12. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 12: Need for intratracheal surfactant therapy post intervention

1.13. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.13. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 13: Duration…

1.13. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 13: Duration of mechanical ventilation (days; in survivors)

1.14. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.14. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 14: Duration…

1.14. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 14: Duration of any respiratory support (days; in survivors)

1.15. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.15. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 15: Duration…

1.15. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 15: Duration of oxygen therapy (days; in survivors)

1.16. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.16. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 16: Postnatal…

1.16. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 16: Postnatal systemic corticosteroid therapy for BPD mitigation

1.17. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.17. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 17: BPD…

1.17. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 17: BPD (physiological definition)

1.18. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.18. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 18: IVH,…

1.18. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 18: IVH, any grade

1.19. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.19. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 19: Cystic…

1.19. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 19: Cystic PVL

1.20. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.20. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 20: PDA…

1.20. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 20: PDA requiring medical therapy

1.21. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.21. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 21: NEC,…

1.21. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 21: NEC, modified Bell stage ≥2

1.22. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.22. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 22: ROP…

1.22. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 22: ROP stage ≥ 3

1.23. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.23. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 23: Duration…

1.23. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 23: Duration of hospitalisation (days; in survivors)

1.24. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC…

1.24. Analysis

Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 24: Discharged…

1.24. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 24: Discharged home with oxygen

2.1. Analysis

Comparison 2: Trials comparing S‐TC…

2.1. Analysis

Comparison 2: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sub‐group analyses, Outcome 1: Death…

2.1. Analysis
Comparison 2: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sub‐group analyses, Outcome 1: Death or BPD

3.1. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC…

3.1. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 1: Death…

3.1. Analysis
Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 1: Death or BPD

3.2. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC…

3.2. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 2: Need…

3.2. Analysis
Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 2: Need for intubation within the first 72 hours

3.3. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC…

3.3. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 3: Air…

3.3. Analysis
Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 3: Air leak requiring drainage

3.4. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC…

3.4. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 4: Severe…

3.4. Analysis
Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 4: Severe IVH

3.5. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC…

3.5. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 5: Death…

3.5. Analysis
Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 5: Death during first hospitalisation

3.6. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC…

3.6. Analysis

Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 6: BPD…

3.6. Analysis
Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 6: BPD (clinical definition); in survivors to 36 weeks' PMA

4.1. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.1. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.1. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 1: Death or BPD

4.2. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.2. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.2. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 2: Incidence of air leak requiring drainage

4.3. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.3. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.3. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 3: Severe IVH

4.4. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.4. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.4. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 4: Death during first hospitalisation

4.5. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.5. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.5. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 5: BPD (clinical definition); in survivors to 36 weeks' PMA

4.6. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.6. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.6. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 6: Catheter/ETT placement unsuccessful at first attempt

4.7. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.7. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.7. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 7: Bradycardia (heart rate

4.8. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.8. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.8. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 8: Need for intubation within the first 72 hours or not intubated but reached failure criteria

4.9. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.9. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.9. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 9: Need for intubation at any time

4.10. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.10. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.10. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 10: Postnatal systemic corticosteroid therapy for BPD mitigation

4.11. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.11. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.11. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 11: Cystic PVL

4.12. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.12. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.12. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 12: ROP ≥ stage 3

4.13. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.13. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.13. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 13: Discharged home with oxygen

4.14. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.14. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.14. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 14: Cerebral palsy by clinical examination or other means

5.1. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.1. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.1. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 1: Air leak

5.2. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.2. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.2. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 2: Severe IVH

5.3. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.3. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.3. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 3: Need for intubation during the procedure

5.4. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.4. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.4. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 4: Need for intubation within the first 24 hours

5.5. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.5. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.5. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 5: Death during first hospitalisation

5.6. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.6. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.6. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 6: Need for positive‐pressure ventilation during the intervention

5.7. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.7. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.7. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 7: Duration of the procedure (seconds)

5.8. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.8. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.8. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 8: Pain score using a validated instrument for measuring discomfort/pain during the procedure (e.g. COMFORTneo score)

5.9. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.9. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.9. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 9: Hypotension requiring treatment
All figures (68)
Update of
  • doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011672
Similar articles
Cited by
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Related information
Full text links [x]
[x]
Cite
Copy Download .nbib
Format: AMA APA MLA NLM
1.10. Analysis
1.10. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 10: Need for intubation within the first 72 hours or not intubated but reached failure criteria
1.11. Analysis
1.11. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 11: Need for intubation at any time
1.12. Analysis
1.12. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 12: Need for intratracheal surfactant therapy post intervention
1.13. Analysis
1.13. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 13: Duration of mechanical ventilation (days; in survivors)
1.14. Analysis
1.14. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 14: Duration of any respiratory support (days; in survivors)
1.15. Analysis
1.15. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 15: Duration of oxygen therapy (days; in survivors)
1.16. Analysis
1.16. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 16: Postnatal systemic corticosteroid therapy for BPD mitigation
1.17. Analysis
1.17. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 17: BPD (physiological definition)
1.18. Analysis
1.18. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 18: IVH, any grade
1.19. Analysis
1.19. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 19: Cystic PVL
1.20. Analysis
1.20. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 20: PDA requiring medical therapy
1.21. Analysis
1.21. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 21: NEC, modified Bell stage ≥2
1.22. Analysis
1.22. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 22: ROP stage ≥ 3
1.23. Analysis
1.23. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 23: Duration of hospitalisation (days; in survivors)
1.24. Analysis
1.24. Analysis
Comparison 1: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 24: Discharged home with oxygen
2.1. Analysis
2.1. Analysis
Comparison 2: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sub‐group analyses, Outcome 1: Death or BPD
3.1. Analysis
3.1. Analysis
Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 1: Death or BPD
3.2. Analysis
3.2. Analysis
Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 2: Need for intubation within the first 72 hours
3.3. Analysis
3.3. Analysis
Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 3: Air leak requiring drainage
3.4. Analysis
3.4. Analysis
Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 4: Severe IVH
3.5. Analysis
3.5. Analysis
Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 5: Death during first hospitalisation
3.6. Analysis
3.6. Analysis
Comparison 3: Trials comparing S‐TC with S‐ETT ‐ sensitivity analysis, Outcome 6: BPD (clinical definition); in survivors to 36 weeks' PMA
4.1. Analysis
4.1. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 1: Death or BPD
4.2. Analysis
4.2. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 2: Incidence of air leak requiring drainage
4.3. Analysis
4.3. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 3: Severe IVH
4.4. Analysis
4.4. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 4: Death during first hospitalisation
4.5. Analysis
4.5. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 5: BPD (clinical definition); in survivors to 36 weeks' PMA
4.6. Analysis
4.6. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 6: Catheter/ETT placement unsuccessful at first attempt
4.7. Analysis
4.7. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 7: Bradycardia (heart rate

4.8. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.8. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.8. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 8: Need for intubation within the first 72 hours or not intubated but reached failure criteria

4.9. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.9. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.9. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 9: Need for intubation at any time

4.10. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.10. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.10. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 10: Postnatal systemic corticosteroid therapy for BPD mitigation

4.11. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.11. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.11. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 11: Cystic PVL

4.12. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.12. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.12. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 12: ROP ≥ stage 3

4.13. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.13. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.13. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 13: Discharged home with oxygen

4.14. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC…

4.14. Analysis

Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis,…

4.14. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 14: Cerebral palsy by clinical examination or other means

5.1. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.1. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.1. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 1: Air leak

5.2. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.2. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.2. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 2: Severe IVH

5.3. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.3. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.3. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 3: Need for intubation during the procedure

5.4. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.4. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.4. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 4: Need for intubation within the first 24 hours

5.5. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.5. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.5. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 5: Death during first hospitalisation

5.6. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.6. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.6. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 6: Need for positive‐pressure ventilation during the intervention

5.7. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.7. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.7. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 7: Duration of the procedure (seconds)

5.8. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.8. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.8. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 8: Pain score using a validated instrument for measuring discomfort/pain during the procedure (e.g. COMFORTneo score)

5.9. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different…

5.9. Analysis

Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐…

5.9. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 9: Hypotension requiring treatment
All figures (68)
4.8. Analysis
4.8. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 8: Need for intubation within the first 72 hours or not intubated but reached failure criteria
4.9. Analysis
4.9. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 9: Need for intubation at any time
4.10. Analysis
4.10. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 10: Postnatal systemic corticosteroid therapy for BPD mitigation
4.11. Analysis
4.11. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 11: Cystic PVL
4.12. Analysis
4.12. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 12: ROP ≥ stage 3
4.13. Analysis
4.13. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 13: Discharged home with oxygen
4.14. Analysis
4.14. Analysis
Comparison 4: Trials comparing S‐TC with continuation of non‐invasive support ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 14: Cerebral palsy by clinical examination or other means
5.1. Analysis
5.1. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 1: Air leak
5.2. Analysis
5.2. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 2: Severe IVH
5.3. Analysis
5.3. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 3: Need for intubation during the procedure
5.4. Analysis
5.4. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 4: Need for intubation within the first 24 hours
5.5. Analysis
5.5. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 5: Death during first hospitalisation
5.6. Analysis
5.6. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 6: Need for positive‐pressure ventilation during the intervention
5.7. Analysis
5.7. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 7: Duration of the procedure (seconds)
5.8. Analysis
5.8. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 8: Pain score using a validated instrument for measuring discomfort/pain during the procedure (e.g. COMFORTneo score)
5.9. Analysis
5.9. Analysis
Comparison 5: Trials comparing different methods of surfactant delivery via thin catheter ‐ overall analysis, Outcome 9: Hypotension requiring treatment

Source: PubMed

3
Suscribir