4.5 Article

Abnormalities in the coordination of respiration and swallow in preterm infants with bronchopulmonary dysplasia

期刊

DEVELOPMENTAL MEDICINE AND CHILD NEUROLOGY
卷 48, 期 7, 页码 595-599

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0012162206001241

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Individual rhythms of suck, swallow, and respiration are disrupted in preterm infants with bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD). Integration of respiration into suck-swallow efforts is critical for establishing coordinated suckle feeding. This study quantitatively assessed the coordination of respiration and swallow in infants with and without BPD. Thirty-four preterm infants of 26 to 33 weeks' gestational age were included: 14 participants with BPD (eight males, six females) and 20 comparison participants without BDP (10 males, 10 females). Paxticipants were studied at postmenstrual age 32 to 40 weeks and postnatal age 2 to 12 weeks using digital recordings of pharyngeal pressure, nasal thermistor flow, and thoraco-abdominal plethysmography. The coefficients of variation (COV, standard deviation/mean) of the swallow-breath (SW-BR) and breath-breath (BR-BR) intervals during swallow runs, the percentage of lapneic swallows' (runs of 2:3 swallows without interposed breaths), and phase relationships of respiration and swallow were used to quantify rhythmic coordination and integration of respiration into feeding episodes. Apneic swallows were significantly increased after 35 weeks in infants with BPD (mean 13.4% [SE 2.4]) compared with non-BDP infants (6.7% [SE 1.8];p < 0.05), as were SW-BR phase relationships involving apnea. The BPD cohort also had significantly higher SW-BR COV and BR-BR COV than non-BPD infants, indicating less rhythmic coordination of swallowing and respiration during feeding. Results emphasize the need for frequent rests and closer monitoring when feeding infants with respiratory compromise. Quantitative assessment of the underlying rhythms involved in feeding may be predictive of longer-term feeding and neurological problems.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据