Comparison of Effects between Nasal Bi-Level Positive Airway Pressure and Nasal Synchronized Intermittent Mandatory Ventilation in Neonatal Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

IF 1 4区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
British journal of hospital medicine Pub Date : 2024-11-30 Epub Date: 2024-11-18 DOI:10.12968/hmed.2024.0454
Yu Zhang, Juan Zhang
{"title":"Comparison of Effects between Nasal Bi-Level Positive Airway Pressure and Nasal Synchronized Intermittent Mandatory Ventilation in Neonatal Respiratory Distress Syndrome.","authors":"Yu Zhang, Juan Zhang","doi":"10.12968/hmed.2024.0454","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Aims/Background</b> Neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (NRDS) is characterized by progressive aggravation and rapid progression of respiratory distress, with a high incidence rate among premature infants. If left untreated, NRDS results in a poor prognosis. In recent years, various respiratory support modalities have received extensive attention in clinical practice. The therapeutic effect of different respiratory support modes on NRDS has gradually become the focus of clinical research. The aim of this study was to explore the therapeutic effects of nasal bi-level positive airway pressure (nBiPAP) and nasal synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation (nSIMV) on NRDS. <b>Methods</b> This study retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 157 newborns with NRDS in the Mudanjiang Medical University Affiliated Second Hospital from January 2021 to December 2023, finally including 153 cases after excluding 4 cases with missing clinical data. According to the non-invasive ventilation method, these newborns were categorized into a nBiPAP group (receiving nBiPAP treatment, n = 77) and an nSIMV group (receiving nSIMV treatment, n = 76). The blood gas indices, using time of ventilator, hospitalization time, therapeutic effects, and incidence of complications were compared between the two groups. <b>Results</b> The PaCO<sub>2</sub>, PaO<sub>2</sub>, and pH levels in the nBiPAP group were basically consistent with those in the nSIMV group before and after treatment (<i>p</i> > 0.05). The use time of ventilator, hospitalization time, and therapeutic effects in the nBiPAP group were similar to those in the nSIMV group (<i>p</i> > 0.05). Additionally, both groups demonstrated no significant difference in the incidence of complications such as intraventricular hemorrhage, apnea, necrotizing enterocolitis, and feeding intolerance (<i>p</i> > 0.05). The incidence rates of ventilator-associated lung injury and neonatal bronchopulmonary dysplasia in the nBiPAP group were lower than those in the nSIMV group, with a significant difference (<i>p</i> < 0.05). <b>Conclusion</b> Both nBiPAP and nSIMV have shown good effects in treating NRDS, with nBiPAP showing a significant advantage in reducing the incidence rates of complications such as ventilator-associated lung injury and neonatal bronchopulmonary dysplasia.</p>","PeriodicalId":9256,"journal":{"name":"British journal of hospital medicine","volume":"85 11","pages":"1-12"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British journal of hospital medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12968/hmed.2024.0454","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims/Background Neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (NRDS) is characterized by progressive aggravation and rapid progression of respiratory distress, with a high incidence rate among premature infants. If left untreated, NRDS results in a poor prognosis. In recent years, various respiratory support modalities have received extensive attention in clinical practice. The therapeutic effect of different respiratory support modes on NRDS has gradually become the focus of clinical research. The aim of this study was to explore the therapeutic effects of nasal bi-level positive airway pressure (nBiPAP) and nasal synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation (nSIMV) on NRDS. Methods This study retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 157 newborns with NRDS in the Mudanjiang Medical University Affiliated Second Hospital from January 2021 to December 2023, finally including 153 cases after excluding 4 cases with missing clinical data. According to the non-invasive ventilation method, these newborns were categorized into a nBiPAP group (receiving nBiPAP treatment, n = 77) and an nSIMV group (receiving nSIMV treatment, n = 76). The blood gas indices, using time of ventilator, hospitalization time, therapeutic effects, and incidence of complications were compared between the two groups. Results The PaCO2, PaO2, and pH levels in the nBiPAP group were basically consistent with those in the nSIMV group before and after treatment (p > 0.05). The use time of ventilator, hospitalization time, and therapeutic effects in the nBiPAP group were similar to those in the nSIMV group (p > 0.05). Additionally, both groups demonstrated no significant difference in the incidence of complications such as intraventricular hemorrhage, apnea, necrotizing enterocolitis, and feeding intolerance (p > 0.05). The incidence rates of ventilator-associated lung injury and neonatal bronchopulmonary dysplasia in the nBiPAP group were lower than those in the nSIMV group, with a significant difference (p < 0.05). Conclusion Both nBiPAP and nSIMV have shown good effects in treating NRDS, with nBiPAP showing a significant advantage in reducing the incidence rates of complications such as ventilator-associated lung injury and neonatal bronchopulmonary dysplasia.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
British journal of hospital medicine
British journal of hospital medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
176
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: British Journal of Hospital Medicine was established in 1966, and is still true to its origins: a monthly, peer-reviewed, multidisciplinary review journal for hospital doctors and doctors in training. The journal publishes an authoritative mix of clinical reviews, education and training updates, quality improvement projects and case reports, and book reviews from recognized leaders in the profession. The Core Training for Doctors section provides clinical information in an easily accessible format for doctors in training. British Journal of Hospital Medicine is an invaluable resource for hospital doctors at all stages of their career. The journal is indexed on Medline, CINAHL, the Sociedad Iberoamericana de Información Científica and Scopus.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信