Heated humidified high-flow nasal cannula versus low-flow nasal cannula as weaning mode from nasal CPAP in infants ≤28 weeks of gestation

被引:18
作者
Jose Ramon Fernandez-Alvarez
Rashmi Shreyans Gandhi
Philip Amess
Liam Mahoney
Ryan Watkins
Heike Rabe
机构
[1] Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust,Department of Neonatology, Trevor Mann Baby Unit, Royal Sussex County Hospital
来源
European Journal of Pediatrics | 2014年 / 173卷
关键词
Heated humidified high-flow nasal cannula; Low-flow nasal cannula; Nasal continuous positive airway pressure; Weaning; Outcome; Premature infant;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Despite the paucity of evidence, the practice of weaning nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) is widespread. However, the most clinically effective non-invasive ventilatory support strategy remains to be determined. We compared the outcome of very premature infants with respiratory distress syndrome treated with a combination of NCPAP and heated humidified high-flow nasal cannula (HHFNC) versus NCPAP and low-flow nasal cannula (LFNC). Between 2004 and 2008, patients ≤28 weeks of gestation and <1,250 g of birth weight were treated with NCPAP + HHFNC or NCPAP + LFNC. Their respiratory and non-respiratory outcome including cost-effectiveness was compared after matching for antenatal steroid doses, mode of delivery, birth plurality, gestational age, birth weight, gender, surfactant doses, length of mechanical ventilation and clinical risk index for babies-II (CRIB-II) score. Thirty-nine infants received HHFNC + NCPAP, and 40 received NCPAP + LFNC. Median gestational age and birth weight were 27 weeks and 930 g and 27 weeks and 980 g, respectively. The total number of NCPAP days was significantly reduced by 50 % in the HHFNC group. Thirteen percent of the patients on NCPAP suffered from nasal bridge lesions compared to none on HHFNC. Respiratory and non-respiratory outcome was not significantly different otherwise. Combination of NCPAP and HHFNC reduced costs by 33 %. Conclusions: HHFNC shortens NCPAP time without increasing overall length of non-invasive respiratory support in very preterm infants. Unlike NCPAP, HHFNC does not seem to increase the risk of nasal trauma and appears to improve cost-effectiveness whilst producing otherwise equal respiratory and non-respiratory outcomes.
引用
收藏
页码:93 / 98
页数:5
相关论文
共 102 条
[1]  
Abdel-Hady H(2011)Early weaning from CPAP to high flow nasal cannula in preterm infants is associated with prolonged oxygen requirement: a randomized controlled trial Early Hum Dev 87 205-208
[2]  
Shouman B(2008)Nasal trauma in preterm infants receiving nasal continuous positive airway pressure Arch Dis Child 93 n23-S83
[3]  
Aly H(2012)Gentle ventilation: the new evidence from the SUPPORT, COIN, VON, CURPAP, Colombian Network, and Neocosur Network trials Early Hum Dev 88 S81-1287
[4]  
Alsop EA(2005)Update: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 54 1286-198
[5]  
Cooke J(1993) species associated with Vapotherm oxygen delivery devices—United States Lancet 342 193-308
[6]  
Gupta SK(2001)The CRIB (clinical risk index for babies) score: a tool for assessing initial neonatal risk and comparing performance of neonatal intensive care units Pediatrics 107 304-106
[7]  
Sinha SK(2008)Lung recruitment and breathing pattern during variable versus continuous flow nasal continuous positive airway pressure in premature infants: an evaluation of three devices Adv Neonatal Care 8 98-81
[8]  
Carlo WA(2005)Humidified high-flow nasal cannula: is it the new and improved CPAP? Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 90 79-F451
[9]  
Cockburn F(2010)Pharyngeal pressure in preterm infants receiving nasal continuous positive airway pressure Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 95 F447-781
[10]  
Cooke RWI(2007)Nasal trauma due to continuous positive airway pressure in neonates J Perinatol 27 776-70