Less invasive surfactant administration versus intubation-surfactant-extubation: a single-center retrospective study

IF 3.6 Q1 PEDIATRICS
Jithin Cs, Nalina A, Shashidhar A, Suman Rao Pn
{"title":"Less invasive surfactant administration versus intubation-surfactant-extubation: a single-center retrospective study","authors":"Jithin Cs, Nalina A, Shashidhar A, Suman Rao Pn","doi":"10.3345/cep.2025.00332","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In recent years, minimally invasive methods have been increasingly utilized for surfactant administration in spontaneously breathing preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) managed with nasal continuous positive airway pressure owing to their feasibility and association with improved respiratory outcomes. However, data are limited from developing countries on the use and effectiveness of these techniques.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of less invasive surfactant administration (LISA) and intubation-surfactant-extubation (InSurE) techniques on the need for intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) within 72 hours of surfactant administration in preterm neonates with RDS. The secondary objectives were the effects of these methods on the need for a second surfactant dose, mortality rate, and other preterm morbidities.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective observational study was conducted in Southern India over 5 years. Clinical outcomes were analyzed in neonates with RDS at 24–34 weeks' gestation who received surfactants via the LISA or InSurE method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 98 neonates were divided into the LISA group (n=54) and the InSurE group (n=44). The need for intubation and MV within 72 hours was significantly lower in the LISA versus InSurE group (18% vs. 64%, P=0.04; relative risk, 0.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.16–0.53). The duration of invasive ventilation was significantly shorter in the LISA group (P<0.001). We observed no significant intergroup differences in the need for a second surfactant dose (17% vs. 7%, P=0.14), bronchopulmonary dysplasia (3.7% vs. 8.8%, P=0.49), or mortality (14.5% vs. 13%, P=0.47).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>LISA appears to be a less invasive and more effective alternative to InSurE, demonstrating the ability to reduce the need for intubation and invasive ventilation within the first 72 hours as well as the duration of invasive support in preterm infants with RDS.</p>","PeriodicalId":36018,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Pediatrics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical and Experimental Pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3345/cep.2025.00332","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In recent years, minimally invasive methods have been increasingly utilized for surfactant administration in spontaneously breathing preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) managed with nasal continuous positive airway pressure owing to their feasibility and association with improved respiratory outcomes. However, data are limited from developing countries on the use and effectiveness of these techniques.

Purpose: The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of less invasive surfactant administration (LISA) and intubation-surfactant-extubation (InSurE) techniques on the need for intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) within 72 hours of surfactant administration in preterm neonates with RDS. The secondary objectives were the effects of these methods on the need for a second surfactant dose, mortality rate, and other preterm morbidities.

Methods: This retrospective observational study was conducted in Southern India over 5 years. Clinical outcomes were analyzed in neonates with RDS at 24–34 weeks' gestation who received surfactants via the LISA or InSurE method.

Results: A total of 98 neonates were divided into the LISA group (n=54) and the InSurE group (n=44). The need for intubation and MV within 72 hours was significantly lower in the LISA versus InSurE group (18% vs. 64%, P=0.04; relative risk, 0.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.16–0.53). The duration of invasive ventilation was significantly shorter in the LISA group (P<0.001). We observed no significant intergroup differences in the need for a second surfactant dose (17% vs. 7%, P=0.14), bronchopulmonary dysplasia (3.7% vs. 8.8%, P=0.49), or mortality (14.5% vs. 13%, P=0.47).

Conclusion: LISA appears to be a less invasive and more effective alternative to InSurE, demonstrating the ability to reduce the need for intubation and invasive ventilation within the first 72 hours as well as the duration of invasive support in preterm infants with RDS.

微创表面活性剂给药与插管表面活性剂拔管:一项单中心回顾性研究。
背景:近年来,由于微创方法的可行性和与改善呼吸结局的相关性,微创方法越来越多地用于自主呼吸早产儿呼吸窘迫综合征(RDS)鼻持续气道正压治疗的表面活性剂给药。但是,发展中国家关于这些技术的使用和有效性的数据有限。目的:本研究的主要目的是评估低创表面活性剂给药(LISA)和插管-表面活性剂-拔管(InSurE)技术对RDS早产儿表面活性剂给药72小时内插管和有创机械通气(MV)需求的影响。次要目标是这些方法对第二次表面活性剂剂量的需求、死亡率和其他早产发病率的影响。方法:在印度南部进行了为期5年的回顾性观察研究。对妊娠24-34周的RDS患儿通过LISA或InSurE方法给予表面活性剂的临床结果进行分析。结果98例新生儿分为LISA组(n=54)和InSurE组(n=44)。与InSurE组相比,LISA组在72小时内插管和MV的需求显著降低(18%对64%,P=0.04;相对风险为0.28;95%置信区间为0.16-0.53)。LISA组有创通气持续时间明显缩短(结论:LISA似乎是一种侵入性更小、更有效的替代方法,证明了在RDS早产儿的头72小时内减少插管和有创通气需求的能力,以及有创支持的持续时间。
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
8.00
自引率
2.40%
发文量
88
审稿时长
60 weeks
×
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