4.4 Article

Impact of targeted-volume ventilation on pulmonary dynamics in preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome

Journal

PEDIATRIC PULMONOLOGY
Volume 52, Issue 2, Pages 213-216

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ppul.23510

Keywords

pulmonary mechanics; volume-guaranteed ventilation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BackgroundMechanical ventilation is an essential therapy in the treatment of respiratory failure in preterm infants. However, optimal ventilation strategy continues to be difficult to define. ObjectiveTo compare the effects of volume guarantee (VG) combined with intermittent mandatory ventilation (SIMV) and VG combined with pressure support ventilation (PSV) on the pulmonary mechanics and short term prognosis in preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome. MethodsInfants of <32 weeks gestational age ventilated for respiratory distress syndrome were randomized to receive either SIMV+VG or PSV+VG. The patient characteristics, ventilator variables including PIP, PEEP, MAP, VT, dynamic compliance, resistance, C20/C, and neonatal outcomes (IVH, ROP, oxygen dependency at 28th postnatal day and 36 weeks of PMA), mortality and extubation failure were recorded in each groups. ResultsThirty-four infants were enrolled in to the study: 19 patients were randomized to the SIMV+VG group, and 15 patients to the PSV+VG group. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of the birth weight, gestational age, gender, multiple pregnancy, delivery mode, and antenatal steroid treatment. The respiratory and ventilatory parameters were similar in the groups. The need for reintubation were common in SIMV+VG group (P<0.01). ConclusionsVolume guaranteed ventilation combined with PSV may be a convenient method for preterm infants with RDS in terms of reducing postextubation atelectasis and the need for reintubation. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2017;52:213-216. (c) 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available