Sustained versus standard inflations during neonatal resuscitation to prevent mortality and improve respiratory outcomes.

IF 8.8 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Matteo Bruschettini, Tilda Moberg, Colm Pf O'Donnell, Peter G Davis, Colin J Morley, Lorenzo Moja, Maria Grazia Calevo
{"title":"Sustained versus standard inflations during neonatal resuscitation to prevent mortality and improve respiratory outcomes.","authors":"Matteo Bruschettini, Tilda Moberg, Colm Pf O'Donnell, Peter G Davis, Colin J Morley, Lorenzo Moja, Maria Grazia Calevo","doi":"10.1002/14651858.CD004953.pub5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Rationale: </strong>At birth, infants' lungs are fluid-filled. For newborns to have a successful transition, this fluid must be replaced by air to enable gas exchange. Some infants are judged to have inadequate breathing at birth and are resuscitated with positive pressure ventilation (PPV). Giving a sustained lung inflation (SLI) at the start of PPV may help clear lung fluid and establish gas volume within the lungs. This is a review update; the last version was published in 2020.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the benefits and harms of an initial SLI (> 1 second duration) versus standard inflations (≤ 1 second) in newborn infants receiving resuscitation with intermittent PPV.</p><p><strong>Search methods: </strong>We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and two trial registries on 8 April 2024. We checked the reference lists of studies and other related papers.</p><p><strong>Eligibility criteria: </strong>We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing initial SLI versus standard inflations given to infants receiving resuscitation with PPV at birth.</p><p><strong>Outcomes: </strong>Our critical outcomes were: death in the delivery room; death during hospitalisation. Other clinically relevant outcomes were: rate of mechanical ventilation; chronic lung disease, any grade; chronic lung disease, moderate to severe; pneumothorax during hospitalisation; intraventricular haemorrhage grade 3 or 4.</p><p><strong>Risk of bias: </strong>We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool 1.0.</p><p><strong>Synthesis methods: </strong>We conducted meta-analyses using fixed-effect models to calculate risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). We summarised the certainty of the evidence according to GRADE methods.</p><p><strong>Included studies: </strong>Fourteen trials enrolling 1766 infants met our inclusion criteria. The studies were conducted on five continents, and published between 2005 and 2024. Investigators in 12 trials (1722 infants) administered SLI with no chest compressions; 10 studies reported that peak inspiratory pressure (PIP) was sustained for 15 seconds. Levels of PIP ranged from 20 to 30 cmH₂O. Investigators in seven studies provided additional SLIs in cases of poor response. We downgraded the overall certainty of evidence for all outcomes because of limitations in study design (e.g. selection bias due to lack of allocation concealment and performance bias due to unblinded intervention), and serious imprecision of results, with wide confidence intervals and few events. One trial is ongoing.</p><p><strong>Synthesis of results: </strong>For each outcome, we downgraded the overall certainty of evidence because of limitations in study design and imprecision. Compared with intermittent ventilation, SLI with no chest compression may result in little to no difference in: • death in the delivery room (RR 1.72, 95% CI 0.82 to 3.63; I² = 0%; 6 studies, 639 participants; low-certainty evidence); • death before discharge (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.21; I² = 37%; 12 studies, 1722 participants; low-certainty evidence); • chronic lung disease, any grade (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.18; I² = 0%; 4 studies, 735 participants; low-certainty evidence); • moderate to severe chronic lung disease (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.22; I² = 47%; 6 studies, 727 participants; low-certainty evidence); • pneumothorax during hospitalisation (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.33; I² = 12%; 11 studies, 1641 participants; low-certainty evidence); • intraventricular haemorrhage grade 3-4 (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.38; I² = 13%; 8 studies, 855 participants; low-certainty evidence). SLI with no chest compression may reduce the rate of mechanical ventilation (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.01; I² = 0%; 7 studies, 1174 participants; low-certainty evidence).</p><p><strong>Authors' conclusions: </strong>Compared with intermittent ventilation, sustained inflation without chest compression may result in little to no difference in death in the delivery room and death before discharge. Sustained inflation may reduce the rate of mechanical ventilation, and may result in little to no difference in chronic lung disease, pneumothorax, and severe intraventricular haemorrhage. There is no evidence to support the use of sustained inflation based on evidence from our review. Future studies of SLI for infants receiving respiratory support at birth should provide more detailed monitoring of the procedure, such as measurements of lung volume and presence of apnoea before or during SLI. Future RCTs should aim to enrol infants who are at higher risk of morbidity and mortality, and should stratify participants by gestational age. Researchers should also measure long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes (e.g. Bayley Scales of Infant Development, administered at two years of corrected age).</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This Cochrane Review had no dedicated funding.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>Protocol (2004): doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004953 Original review (2015): doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004953.pub2 Review update (2017): doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004953.pub3 Review update (2020): doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004953.pub4.</p>","PeriodicalId":10473,"journal":{"name":"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews","volume":"7 ","pages":"CD004953"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12272818/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004953.pub5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Rationale: At birth, infants' lungs are fluid-filled. For newborns to have a successful transition, this fluid must be replaced by air to enable gas exchange. Some infants are judged to have inadequate breathing at birth and are resuscitated with positive pressure ventilation (PPV). Giving a sustained lung inflation (SLI) at the start of PPV may help clear lung fluid and establish gas volume within the lungs. This is a review update; the last version was published in 2020.

Objectives: To assess the benefits and harms of an initial SLI (> 1 second duration) versus standard inflations (≤ 1 second) in newborn infants receiving resuscitation with intermittent PPV.

Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and two trial registries on 8 April 2024. We checked the reference lists of studies and other related papers.

Eligibility criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing initial SLI versus standard inflations given to infants receiving resuscitation with PPV at birth.

Outcomes: Our critical outcomes were: death in the delivery room; death during hospitalisation. Other clinically relevant outcomes were: rate of mechanical ventilation; chronic lung disease, any grade; chronic lung disease, moderate to severe; pneumothorax during hospitalisation; intraventricular haemorrhage grade 3 or 4.

Risk of bias: We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool 1.0.

Synthesis methods: We conducted meta-analyses using fixed-effect models to calculate risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). We summarised the certainty of the evidence according to GRADE methods.

Included studies: Fourteen trials enrolling 1766 infants met our inclusion criteria. The studies were conducted on five continents, and published between 2005 and 2024. Investigators in 12 trials (1722 infants) administered SLI with no chest compressions; 10 studies reported that peak inspiratory pressure (PIP) was sustained for 15 seconds. Levels of PIP ranged from 20 to 30 cmH₂O. Investigators in seven studies provided additional SLIs in cases of poor response. We downgraded the overall certainty of evidence for all outcomes because of limitations in study design (e.g. selection bias due to lack of allocation concealment and performance bias due to unblinded intervention), and serious imprecision of results, with wide confidence intervals and few events. One trial is ongoing.

Synthesis of results: For each outcome, we downgraded the overall certainty of evidence because of limitations in study design and imprecision. Compared with intermittent ventilation, SLI with no chest compression may result in little to no difference in: • death in the delivery room (RR 1.72, 95% CI 0.82 to 3.63; I² = 0%; 6 studies, 639 participants; low-certainty evidence); • death before discharge (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.21; I² = 37%; 12 studies, 1722 participants; low-certainty evidence); • chronic lung disease, any grade (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.18; I² = 0%; 4 studies, 735 participants; low-certainty evidence); • moderate to severe chronic lung disease (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.22; I² = 47%; 6 studies, 727 participants; low-certainty evidence); • pneumothorax during hospitalisation (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.33; I² = 12%; 11 studies, 1641 participants; low-certainty evidence); • intraventricular haemorrhage grade 3-4 (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.38; I² = 13%; 8 studies, 855 participants; low-certainty evidence). SLI with no chest compression may reduce the rate of mechanical ventilation (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.01; I² = 0%; 7 studies, 1174 participants; low-certainty evidence).

Authors' conclusions: Compared with intermittent ventilation, sustained inflation without chest compression may result in little to no difference in death in the delivery room and death before discharge. Sustained inflation may reduce the rate of mechanical ventilation, and may result in little to no difference in chronic lung disease, pneumothorax, and severe intraventricular haemorrhage. There is no evidence to support the use of sustained inflation based on evidence from our review. Future studies of SLI for infants receiving respiratory support at birth should provide more detailed monitoring of the procedure, such as measurements of lung volume and presence of apnoea before or during SLI. Future RCTs should aim to enrol infants who are at higher risk of morbidity and mortality, and should stratify participants by gestational age. Researchers should also measure long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes (e.g. Bayley Scales of Infant Development, administered at two years of corrected age).

Funding: This Cochrane Review had no dedicated funding.

Registration: Protocol (2004): doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004953 Original review (2015): doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004953.pub2 Review update (2017): doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004953.pub3 Review update (2020): doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004953.pub4.

在新生儿复苏期间持续与标准通货膨胀预防死亡率和改善呼吸结果。
原理:出生时,婴儿的肺部充满液体。新生儿要成功过渡,这种液体必须被空气取代,以实现气体交换。一些婴儿在出生时被判断为呼吸不足,并使用正压通气(PPV)进行复苏。在PPV开始时给予持续的肺充气(SLI)可能有助于清除肺液并建立肺内的气量。这是一个回顾更新;最新版本于2020年出版。目的:评估在接受间歇PPV复苏的新生儿中,初始SLI(持续时间为100秒)与标准充气(≤1秒)的利弊。检索方法:我们于2024年4月8日检索了Cochrane中央对照试验注册库(Central)、MEDLINE(通过PubMed、Embase)、护理和相关健康文献累积索引(CINAHL)和两个试验注册库。我们查阅了相关研究和其他相关论文的参考文献列表。入选标准:我们纳入了随机对照试验(rct)和准rct,比较出生时接受PPV复苏的婴儿的初始SLI和标准通货膨胀。结局:我们的关键结局是:产房死亡;住院期间死亡。其他临床相关指标为:机械通气率;慢性肺部疾病,任何级别;慢性肺病,中重度;住院期间气胸;脑室内出血3或4级。偏倚风险:我们使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具1.0。综合方法:我们使用固定效应模型进行meta分析,计算风险比(RR)和95%置信区间(CI)。我们根据GRADE方法总结证据的确定性。纳入研究:14项纳入1766名婴儿的试验符合我们的纳入标准。这些研究在五大洲进行,并于2005年至2024年间发表。在12项试验(1722名婴儿)中,研究者在没有胸外按压的情况下给予SLI;10项研究报告峰值吸气压力(PIP)持续15秒。PIP水平在20 ~ 30 cmH₂O之间。在七项研究中,研究人员在反应不佳的情况下提供了额外的sli。由于研究设计的局限性(例如,由于缺乏分配隐蔽性导致的选择偏倚和由于非盲法干预导致的表现偏倚),以及由于置信区间宽和事件少而导致的结果严重不精确,我们降低了所有结果证据的总体确定性。一项试验正在进行中。综合结果:由于研究设计和不精确的限制,我们降低了每个结果的证据的总体确定性。与间歇通气相比,无胸压的SLI在以下方面几乎没有差异:•产房死亡(RR 1.72, 95% CI 0.82至3.63;I²= 0%;6项研究,639名参与者;确定性的证据);•出院前死亡(RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.81 ~ 1.21);I²= 37%;12项研究,1722名参与者;确定性的证据);•慢性肺部疾病,任何级别(RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.83 ~ 1.18);I²= 0%;4项研究,735名受试者;确定性的证据);•中度至重度慢性肺病(RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.74 ~ 1.22);I²= 47%;6项研究,727名受试者;确定性的证据);•住院期间气胸(RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.65 ~ 1.33;I²= 12%;11项研究,1641名参与者;确定性的证据);•3-4级脑室内出血(RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.64 ~ 1.38;I²= 13%;8项研究,855名参与者;确定性的证据)。无胸压的SLI可降低机械通气率(RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80 ~ 1.01;I²= 0%;7项研究,1174名受试者;确定性的证据)。作者的结论是:与间歇通气相比,持续充气无胸压可能导致产房死亡和出院前死亡的差异很小或没有差异。持续充气可降低机械通气率,在慢性肺病、气胸和严重脑室内出血方面几乎没有差别。根据我们审查的证据,没有证据支持使用持续通胀。未来对出生时接受呼吸支持的婴儿进行的特殊语言障碍研究应该提供更详细的过程监测,例如在特殊语言障碍之前或期间测量肺容量和呼吸暂停的存在。未来的随机对照试验应旨在纳入发病率和死亡率风险较高的婴儿,并应按胎龄对参与者进行分层。研究人员还应该测量长期的神经发育结果(例如,在矫正年龄两岁时进行的Bayley婴儿发育量表)。资金来源:Cochrane综述没有专门的资金来源。注册:议定书(2004):doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004953原始审查(2015):doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004953.pub2审查更新(2017):doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004953。 pub3 Review update (2020): doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004953.pub4。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
2.40%
发文量
173
审稿时长
1-2 weeks
期刊介绍: The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) stands as the premier database for systematic reviews in healthcare. It comprises Cochrane Reviews, along with protocols for these reviews, editorials, and supplements. Owned and operated by Cochrane, a worldwide independent network of healthcare stakeholders, the CDSR (ISSN 1469-493X) encompasses a broad spectrum of health-related topics, including health services.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信