Infant flow biphasic nasal continuous positive airway pressure (BP- NCPAP) vs. infant flow NCPAP for the facilitation of extubation in infants' ≤ 1,250 grams: a randomized controlled trial

Karel O'Brien, Craig Campbell, Leanne Brown, Lisa Wenger, Vibhuti Shah, Karel O'Brien, Craig Campbell, Leanne Brown, Lisa Wenger, Vibhuti Shah

Abstract

Background: The use of mechanical ventilation is associated with lung injury in preterm infants and therefore the goal is to avoid or minimize its use. To date there is very little consensus on what is considered the "best non-invasive ventilation mode" to be used post-extubation. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of biphasic nasal continuous positive airway pressure (BP-NCPAP) vs. NCPAP in facilitating sustained extubation in infants ≤ 1,250 grams.

Methods: We performed a randomized controlled trial of BP-NCPAP vs. NCPAP in infants ≤ 1,250 grams extubated for the first time following mechanical ventilation since birth. Infants were extubated using preset criteria or at the discretion of the attending neonatologist. The primary outcome was the incidence of sustained extubation for 7 days. Secondary outcomes included incidence of adverse events and short-term neonatal outcomes.

Results: Sixty-seven infants received BP-NCPAP and 69 NCPAP. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. The trial was stopped early due to increased use of non-invasive ventilation from birth, falling short of our calculated sample size of 141 infants per group. The incidence of sustained extubation was not statistically different between the BP-NCPAP vs. NCPAP group (67% vs. 58%, P = 0.27). The incidence of adverse events and short-term neonatal outcomes were similar between the two groups (P > 0.05) except for retinopathy of prematurity which was noted to be higher (P = 0.02) in the BP-NCPAP group.

Conclusions: Biphasic NCPAP may be used to assist in weaning from mechanical ventilation. The effectiveness and safety of BP-NCPAP compared to NCPAP needs to be confirmed in a large multi-center trial as our study conclusions are limited by inadequate sample size. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION #: NCT00308789 SOURCE OF SUPPORT: Grant # 06-06, Physicians Services Incorporated Foundation, Toronto, Canada. Summit technologies Inc. provided additional NCPAP systems and an unrestricted educational grant.Abstract presented at The Society for Pediatric Research Meeting, Baltimore, USA, May 2nd-5th, 2009 and Canadian Paediatric Society Meeting, June 23rd-29th, Ottawa, 2009.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram of study participants.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Comparison of the effectiveness of NIPPV vs. NCPAP to prevent extubation failure.

References

    1. Lemons JA, Bauer CR, Oh W, Korones SB, Papile LA, Stoll BJ, Verter J, Temprosa M, Wright LL, Ehrenkranz RA, Fanaroff AA, Stark A, Carlo W, Tyson JE, Donovan EF, Shankaran S, Stevenson DK. Very low birth weight outcomes of the National Institute of Child health and human development neonatal research network, January 1995 through December 1996. Pediatrics. 2001;107:E1. doi: 10.1542/peds.107.1.e1.
    1. Jones HP, Karuri S, Cronin CM, Ohlsson A, Peliowski A, Synnes A, Lee SK. Canadian Neonatal Network: Actuarial survival of a large Canadian cohort of preterm infants. BMC Pediatr. 2005;5:40. doi: 10.1186/1471-2431-5-40.
    1. Horbar JD, Soll RF, Edwards WH. The Vermont Oxford Network: a community of practice. Clin Perinatol. 2010;37:29–47. doi: 10.1016/j.clp.2010.01.003.
    1. European Perinatal Health Report. 2008.
    1. SUPPORT Study Group of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver NICHD Neonatal Research Network. Finer NN, Carlo WA, Walsh MC, Rich W, Gantz MG, Laptook AR, Yoder BA, Faix RG, Das A, Poole WK, Donovan EF, Newman NS, Ambalavanan N, Frantz ID, Buchter S, Sánchez PJ, Kennedy KA, Laroia N, Poindexter BB, Cotten CM, Van Meurs KP, Duara S, Narendran V, Sood BG, O'Shea TM, Bell EF, Bhandari V, Watterberg KL, Higgins RD. Early CPAP versus surfactant in extremely preterm infants. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1970–1979.
    1. Coalson JJ, Winter VT, Siler-Khodr T, Yoder BA. Neonatal chronic lung disease in extremely immature baboons. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1999;160:1333–1346.
    1. Morley CJ, Davis PG. Continuous positive airway pressure: scientific and clinical rationale. Curr Opin Pediatr. 2008;20:119–124. doi: 10.1097/MOP.0b013e3282f63953.
    1. Loeliger M, Inder T, Cain S, Ramesh RC, Camm E, Thomson MA, Coalson J, Rees SM. Cerebral outcomes in a preterm baboon model of early versus delayed nasal continuous positive airway pressure. Pediatrics. 2006;118:1640–1653. doi: 10.1542/peds.2006-0653.
    1. Schmidt B, Roberts RS, Davis P, Doyle LW, Barrington KJ, Ohlsson A, Solimano A, Tin W. Caffeine for Apnea of Prematurity Trial Group: Caffeine therapy for apnea of prematurity. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:2112–2121. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa054065.
    1. Schmidt B, Roberts RS, Davis P, Doyle LW, Barrington KJ, Ohlsson A, Solimano A, Tin W, Caffeine for Apnea of Prematurity Trial Group. Long-term effects of caffeine therapy for apnea of prematurity. N Engl J Med.
    1. Klausner JF, Lee AY, Hutchison AA. Decreased imposed work with a new nasal continuous positive airway pressure device. Pediatr Pulmonol. 1996;22:188–194. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0496(199609)22:3<188::AID-PPUL8>;2-L.
    1. Courtney SE, Pyon KH, Saslow JG, Arnold GK, Pandit PB, Habib RH. Lung recruitment and breathing pattern during variable versus continuous flow nasal continuous positive airway pressure in premature infants: an evaluation of three devices. Pediatrics. 2001;107:304–308. doi: 10.1542/peds.107.2.304.
    1. Pandit PB, Courtney SE, Pyon KH, Saslow JG, Habib RH. Work of breathing during constant- and variable-flow nasal continuous positive airway pressure in preterm neonates. Pediatrics. 2001;108:682–685. doi: 10.1542/peds.108.3.682.
    1. Boumecid H, Rakza T, Abazine A, Klosowski S, Matran R, Storme L. Influence of three nasal continuous positive airway pressure devices on breathing pattern in preterm infants. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2007;92:F298–F300. doi: 10.1136/adc.2006.103762.
    1. Bell MJ, Ternberg JL, Feigin RD, Keating JP, Marshall R, Barton L, Brotherton T. Neonatal necrotizing enterocolitis. Therapeutic decisions based upon clinical staging. Ann Surg. 1978;187:1–7. doi: 10.1097/00000658-197801000-00001.
    1. Papile LA, Burstein J, Burstein R, Koffler H. Incidence and evaluation of subependymal and intraventricular hemorrhage: a study of infants with birth weight less than 1,500 grams. J Pediatr. 1978;92:529–534. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3476(78)80282-0.
    1. International committee for the classification of retinopathy of prematurity. The International classification of retinopathy of prematurity revisited. Arch Ophthalmol. 2005;123:991–999.
    1. Campbell DM, Shah PS, Shah V, Kelly EN. Nasal continuous positive airway pressure from high flow cannula versus Infant Flow for Preterm infants. J Perinatol. 2006;26:546–549. doi: 10.1038/sj.jp.7211561.
    1. Davis PG, Lemyre B, De Paoli AG. Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for preterm neonates after extubation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001;3:CD003212.
    1. Moretti C, Giannini L, Fassi C, Gizzi C, Papoff P, Colarizi P. Nasal flow-synchronized intermittent positive pressure ventilation to facilitate weaning in very low-birthweight infants: unmasked randomized controlled trial. Pediatr Int. 2008;50:85–91. doi: 10.1111/j.1442-200X.2007.02525.x.
    1. Friedlich P, Lecart C, Posen R, Ramicone E, Chan L, Ramanathan R. A randomized trial of nasopharyngeal-synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation versus nasopharyngeal continuous positive airway pressure in very low birth weight infants after extubation. J Perinatol. 1999;19:413–418. doi: 10.1038/sj.jp.7200205.
    1. Barrington KJ, Bull D, Finer NN. Randomized trial of nasal synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation compared with continuous positive airway pressure after extubation of very low birth weight infants. Pediatrics. 2001;107:638–641. doi: 10.1542/peds.107.4.638.
    1. Khalaf MN, Brodsky N, Hurley J, Bhandari V. A prospective randomized, controlled trial comparing synchronized nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure as modes of extubation. Pediatrics. 2001;108:13–17. doi: 10.1542/peds.108.1.13.
    1. Moretti C, Gizzi C, Papoff P, Lampariello S, Capoferri M, Calcagnini G, Bucci G. Comparing the effects of nasal synchronized intermittent positive pressure ventilation (nSIPPV) and nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) after extubation in very low birth weight infants. Early Hum Dev. 1999;56:167–177. doi: 10.1016/S0378-3782(99)00046-8.
    1. Owen LS, Morley CJ, Davis PG. Neonatal nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation: what do we know in 2007? Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2007;92:F414–F418. doi: 10.1136/adc.2007.117614.
    1. Greenough A. Respiratory support techniques for prematurely born infants: new advances and perspectives. Acta Paediatr Taiwan. 2001;42:201–206.
    1. Lista G, Castoldui F, Fontana P, Danielle I, Cavigioli F, Rossi S, Mancuso D, Reali R. Nasal continuous airway pressure (CPAP) versus bi-level nasal CPAP in preterm babies with respiratory distress syndrome: a randomised controlled trial. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2010;95:F85–F89. doi: 10.1136/adc.2009.169219.
    1. Shanmugananda K, Rawal J. Nasal trauma due to nasal continuous positive airway pressure in newborns. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2007;92:F18. doi: 10.1136/adc.2006.095034.
    1. Morley CJ, Davis PG, Doyle LW, Brion LP, Hascoet JM, Carlin JB. Nasal CPAP or intubation at birth for very preterm infants. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:700–708. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa072788.
    1. Garland JS, Nelson DB, Rice T, Neu J. Increased risk of gastrointestinal perforations in neonates mechanically ventilated with either face mask or nasal prongs. Pediatrics. 1985;76:406–410.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors et collaborateurs

Les conditions médicales

Interventions en matière de drogue

3
S'abonner