Search

Although mechanical ventilation via an endotracheal tube has undoubtedly led to improvement in neonatal survival in the last 40 years, the prolonged use of this technique may predispose the infant to development of many possible complications including bronchopulmonary dysplasia. Avoiding mechanical ventilation is thought to be a critical goal, and different modes of noninvasive respiratory support beyond nasal continuous positive airway pressure, such as nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation and synchronized nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation, are also available and may reduce intubation rate. Several trials have demonstrated that the newer modes of noninvasive ventilation are more effective than nasal continuous positive airway pressure in reducing extubation failure and may also be more helpful as modes of primary support to treat respiratory distress syndrome after surfactant and for treatment of apnea of prematurity. With synchronized noninvasive ventilation, these benefits are more consistent, and different modes of synchronization have been reported. Although flow-triggering is the most common mode of synchronization, this technique is not reliable for noninvasive ventilation in neonates because it is affected by variable leaks at the mouth and nose. This review discusses the mechanisms of action, benefits and limitations of noninvasive ventilation, describes the different modes of synchronization and analyzes the technical characteristics, properties and clinical results of a flow-sensor expressly developed for synchronized noninvasive ventilation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Apnoea, desaturations and bradycardias are common problems in preterm infants which can be treated with nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) and nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV). It is unclear whether synchronised NIPPV (SNIPPV) would be even more effective. Objective To assess the effects of flow-SNIPPV, NIPPV and NCPAP on the rate of desaturations and bradycardias in preterm infants and, secondarily, to evaluate their influence on pattern of breathing and gas exchange. Patients and methods Nineteen infants (mean gestational age at study 30 weeks, 9 boys) with apnoeic spells were enrolled in a randomised controlled trial with a cross-over design. They received flow-SNIPPV, NIPPV and NCPAP for 4 h each. All modes were provided by a nasal conventional ventilator able to provide synchronisation by a pneumotachograph. The primary outcome was the event rate of desaturations (≤80% arterial oxygen saturation) and bradycardias (≤80 bpm) per hour, obtained from cardiorespiratory recordings. The incidence of central apnoeas (≥10 s) as well as baseline heart rate, FiO2, SpO2, transcutaneous blood gases and respiratory rate were also evaluated. Results The median event rate per hour during flow-SNIPPV, NIPPV and NCPAP was 2.9, 6.1 and 5.9, respectively (p<0.001 and 0.009, compared with flow-SNIPPV). Central apnoeas per hour were 2.4, 6.3 and 5.4, respectively (p=0.001, for both compared with flow-SNIPPV), while no differences in any other parameter studied were recorded. Conclusions Flow-SNIPPV seems more effective than NIPPV and NCPAP in reducing the incidence of desaturations, bradycardias and central apnoea episodes in preterm infants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Nasal flow-synchronized intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NFSIPPV) is a new non-invasive ventilatory mode that delivers synchronized mechanical breaths through the nasal prongs. An unmasked, prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare the efficacy of NFSIPPV and conventional nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) in increasing the likelihood for successful extubation in very low-birthweight infants. Methods: Consecutive infants who weighed <1251 g at birth, required endotracheal intubation within 48 h of birth and met specific predetermined criteria for extubation by day 14 of life were recruited. Each infant was randomized to receive either NFSIPPV or NCPAP soon after extubation. Extubation was deemed successful if re-intubation was not needed for at least 72 h. Criteria for re-intubation were persistent severe respiratory acidosis (arterial pH <7.20 with pCO2 >70 mmHg), severe recurrent apneic episodes not responding to increased ventilatory settings and then requiring bag ventilation, and hypoxemia (SaO2 <90% or pO2 <60 mmHg with FiO2 ≥0.70). Results: There were no significant differences in clinical characteristics between the two groups at randomization. Ninety-four percent (30/32) infants were successfully extubated to NFSIPPV but only 61% (19/31) to conventional NCPAP ( P > 0.005). Infants assigned to NCPAP failed extubation mainly because of apnea and hypercapnia, and those assigned to NFSIPPV because of hypoxia. Neither procedure induced major adverse effects. Conclusions: NFSIPPV in the post-extubation period is safe and more effective than NCPAP in preventing re-ventilation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]