Is High-Flow Nasal Cannula Useful as Primary Respiratory Support in Preterm Infants?

Neonatology ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 114 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-25
Author(s):  
Subhash Chandra Shaw ◽  
Kannan Venkatnarayan ◽  
Rakesh Gupta
Keyword(s):  
Preterm Infants ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Nasal Cannula ◽  
Respiratory Support ◽  
High Flow Nasal Cannula

High-Flow Nasal Cannula Versus CPAP For Respiratory Support in Preterm Infants

2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 11-15
Author(s):  
Abdul Razak ◽  
Siddu Charki ◽  
N Karthik Nagesh
Keyword(s):  
Preterm Infants ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Nasal Cannula ◽  
Respiratory Support ◽  
High Flow Nasal Cannula

Heated Humidified High-Flow Nasal Cannula for Preterm Infants: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 298-306 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nigel Fleeman ◽  
Yenal Dundar ◽  
Prakesh S Shah ◽  
Ben NJ Shaw
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Preterm Infants ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Nasal Cannula ◽  
Respiratory Support ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
High Flow Nasal Cannula ◽  
Safe Alternative

AbstractBackgroundHeated humidified high-flow nasal cannula (HHHFNC) is gaining popularity as a mode of respiratory support. We updated a systematic review and meta-analyses examining the efficacy and safety of HHHFNC compared with standard treatments for preterm infants. The primary outcome was the need for reintubation for preterm infants following mechanical ventilation (post-extubation analysis) or need for intubation for preterm infants not previously intubated (analysis of primary respiratory support)MethodsWe searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of HHHFNC versus standard treatments. Meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.3.ResultsThe post-extubation analysis included ten RCTs (n = 1,201), and the analysis of primary respiratory support included ten RCTs (n = 1,676). There were no statistically significant differences for outcomes measuring efficacy, including the primary outcome. There were statistically significant differences favoring HHHFNC versus nasal cannula positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for air leak (post-extubation, risk ratio [RR] 0.29, 95 percent confidence interval [CI] 0.11 to 0.76, I2 = 0) and nasal trauma (post-extubation: 0.35, 95 percent CI 0.27 to 0.46, I2 = 5 percent; primary respiratory support: RR 0.52, 95 percent CI 0.37 to 0.74; I2 = 27 percent). Studies, particularly those of primary respiratory support, included very few preterm infants with gestational age (GA) <28 weeks.ConclusionsHHHFNC may offer an efficacious and safe alternative to NCPAP for some infants but evidence is lacking for preterm infants with GA ≤28 weeks.

High-Flow Nasal Cannula Versus CPAP for Respiratory Support in Preterm Infants

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 6-10
Author(s):  
Abdul Razak ◽  
Siddu Charki ◽  
N Karthik Nagesh
Keyword(s):  
Preterm Infants ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Nasal Cannula ◽  
Respiratory Support ◽  
High Flow Nasal Cannula
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document