Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation for Preterm Neonates: Synchronized or Not?

Publikation: Beitrag in FachzeitschriftÜbersichtsartikel (Review)BeigetragenBegutachtung

Beitragende

  • Markus Waitz - , Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (Autor:in)
  • Lars Mense - , Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (Autor:in)
  • Haresh Kirpalani - , Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) (Autor:in)
  • Brigitte Lemyre - , Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (Autor:in)

Abstract

Although continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is an effective strategy to prevent invasive ventilation, failure rates are high and many babies require endotracheal intubation. Prolonged exposure to mechanical ventilation is linked with bronchopulmonary dysplasia and other morbidities. Different techniques of nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) have been proposed as an alternative to CPAP. Bilevel NIPPV and conventional mechanical ventilator-driven NIPPV are used in clinical practice. Both methods differ substantially in pressures and cycling times, potentially affecting their mechanism of action. This review focuses on noninvasive ventilation strategies, their physiologic effects, impact on clinical outcome parameters, and effects of synchronization.

Details

OriginalspracheEnglisch
Seiten (von - bis)799-816
Seitenumfang18
FachzeitschriftClinics in Perinatology
Jahrgang43
Ausgabenummer4
PublikationsstatusVeröffentlicht - Dez. 2016
Peer-Review-StatusJa
Extern publiziertJa

Externe IDs

Scopus 84995543290
ORCID /0000-0002-2586-8987/work/149081833

Schlagworte

Schlagwörter

  • Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia/epidemiology, Continuous Positive Airway Pressure/methods, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Infant, Premature, Intermittent Positive-Pressure Ventilation/methods, Noninvasive Ventilation/methods, Respiration, Artificial, Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Newborn/therapy