scholarly journals A comparative study of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and intermittent positive pressure ventilation (IPPV) in patients with flail chest

2005 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 325-329 ◽  
Author(s):  
M Gunduz
Keyword(s):  
Continuous Positive Airway Pressure ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Airway Pressure ◽  
Positive Pressure Ventilation ◽  
Positive Airway Pressure ◽  
Flail Chest ◽  
Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation ◽  
Positive Pressure

Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation versus Continuous Positive Airway Pressure and Apnea of Prematurity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bayane Sabsabi ◽  
Ava Harrison ◽  
Laura Banfield ◽  
Amit Mukerji
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Continuous Positive Airway Pressure ◽  
Airway Pressure ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Positive Pressure Ventilation ◽  
Positive Airway Pressure ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation ◽  
Positive Pressure ◽  
Apnea Of Prematurity

Objective The study aimed to systematically review and analyze the impact of nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) on apnea of prematurity (AOP) in preterm neonates. Study Design In this systematic review and meta-analysis, experimental studies enrolling preterm infants comparing NIPPV (synchronized, nonsynchronized, and bi-level) and CPAP (all types) were searched in multiple databases and screened for the assessment of AOP. Primary outcome was AOP frequency per hour (as defined by authors of included studies). Results Out of 4,980 articles identified, 18 studies were included with eight studies contributing to the primary outcome. All studies had a high risk of bias, with significant heterogeneity in definition and measurement of AOP. There was no difference in AOPs per hour between NIPPV versus CPAP (weighted mean difference = −0.19; 95% confidence interval [CI]: −0.76 to 0.37; eight studies, 456 patients). However, in a post hoc analysis evaluating the presence of any AOP (over varying time periods), the pooled odds ratio (OR) was lower with NIPPV (OR: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.32–0.67; 10 studies, 872 patients). Conclusion NIPPV was not associated with decrease in AOP frequency, although demonstrated lower odds of developing any AOP. However, definite recommendations cannot be made based on the quality of the published evidence. Key Points

Comparison of Early Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation and Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure in Preterm Infants with Respiratory Distress Syndrome

2018 ◽  
Vol 65 (4) ◽  
pp. 352-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mesut Dursun ◽  
Sinan Uslu ◽  
Ali Bulbul ◽  
Muhittin Celik ◽  
Umut Zubarioglu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Continuous Positive Airway Pressure ◽  
Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽  
Airway Pressure ◽  
Positive Pressure Ventilation ◽  
Distress Syndrome ◽  
Positive Airway Pressure ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation ◽  
Positive Pressure

Abstract Aims To compare the effect of early nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (nIPPV) and nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) in terms of the need for endotracheal ventilation in the treatment of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) in preterm infants born between 24 and 32 gestational weeks. Methods This is a randomized, controlled, prospective, single-centered study. Forty-two infants were randomized to nIPPV and 42 comparable infants to nCPAP (birth weight 1356 ± 295 and 1359 ± 246 g and gestational age 29.2 ± 1.7 and 29.4 ± 1.5 weeks, respectively). Results The need for endotracheal intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation was significantly lower in the nIPPV group than the nCPAP group (11.9% and 40.5%, respectively, p < 0.05). There were no differences in the duration of total nasal respiratory support, duration of invasive mechanical ventilation, bronchopulmonary dysplasia or other early morbidities. Conclusion nIPPV compared with nCPAP reduced the need for endotracheal intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation in premature infants with RDS.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document