Nasal mask vs binasal prongs for nasal continuous positive airway pressure in preterm infants: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Non-Invasive Ventilatory Support in Preterm Neonates in the Delivery Room and the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: A Short Narrative Review of What We Know in 2024

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend non-invasive ventilatory (NIV) support as first-line respiratory support mode in preterm infants as NIV is superior to intubation and mechanical ventilation in preventing death or bronchopulmonary dysplasia. However, with an ever-expanding variety of NIV modes available, there is much debate about which NIV modality should ideally be used, how, and when. The aims of this work were to summarise the evidence on different NIV modalities for both primary and secondary respiratory support: nCPAP, nasal high-flow therapy (nHFT), and nasal intermittent positive airway pressure ventilation (nIPPV), bi-level positive airway pressure (BiPAP), nasal high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (nHFOV), and nasally applied, non-invasive neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NIV-NAVA) modes, with particular focus on their use in preterm infants.

SUMMARY

This is a narrative review with reference to published guidelines by European Consensus Guidelines on the Management of Respiratory Distress Syndrome: 2022 Update. nCPAP is currently the most commonly used primary and secondary NIV modality for premature infants. However, there is increasing evidence on the superiority of nIPPV over nCPAP. No beneficial effect was found for BiPAP over nCPAP. For the use of nHFT, nHFOV, and NIV-NAVA, more studies are needed to establish their place in neonatal respiratory care.

KEY MESSAGES

The superiority of nIPPV over nCPAP needs to be confirmed by contemporaneous trials comparing nCPAP to nIPPV at comparable mean airway pressures. Future trials should study NIV modalities in preterm infants with comparable respiratory pathology and indications, at comparable pressure settings and with different modes of synchronisation. Importantly, future trials should not exclude infants of the smallest gestational ages.

Reintubation Rate between Nasal High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation versus Synchronized Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation in Neonates: A Parallel Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

Nasal high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (nHFOV) and synchronized nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (sNIPPV) were the new modes of noninvasive ventilation. This study's aim was to clarify as to which of the nHFOV and sNIPPV modes was superior in preventing postextubation failure or reintubation in neonates.

STUDY DESIGN

An open-label parallel randomized study was performed. Extubated preterm and term neonates were randomly allocated into nHFOV or sNIPPV modes; the reintubation rate was evaluated within 7 days after extubation between the two modes. Subgroup analyses were performed for preterm (gestational age <37 weeks) and very preterm (gestational age <32 weeks) neonates. The sample calculation was 1,050 neonates; however, this trial was stopped early as enrollment was too slow.

RESULTS

From July 2020 to June 2022, 202 neonates were assessed for eligibility and 69 neonates were excluded. Finally, 133 neonates were randomly allocated to the study interventions (nHFOV = 67, sNIPPV = 66). The median gestational age and birth weight were 33 (30-37) weeks and 1,910 (1,355-2,836) g, respectively. The reintubation rate within 7 days did not significantly differ between the groups (nHFOV [5/67, 7%] vs. sNIPPV [4/66, 6%]); risk difference [95% confidence interval] = 0.01 [-0.08 to 0.11]; p = 0.99), including preterm (nHFOV [4/55, 7%] vs. sNIPPV [3/44, 7%]) and very preterm (nHFOV [3/25, 12%] vs. sNIPPV [3/25, 12%]) neonates.

CONCLUSION

After neonatal extubation, there was no significant difference of reintubation rates within 7 days between nHFOV and sNIPPV. This trial has been registered in the ClinicalTrials.gov database ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04323397 ). First posted registration on March 26, 2020.

KEY POINTS

· There was no significant difference of reintubation rates between nHFOV and sNIPPV.. · During nHFOV support, one neonate developed pneumomediastinum.. · During sNIPPV support, one neonate developed pulmonary hemorrhage..

Carbon Dioxide Level between Nasal High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation and Synchronized Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation after Extubation in Neonates: A Cross-over Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

Nasal high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (nHFOV) and synchronized nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (sNIPPV) yield a lower partial pressure of carbon dioxide (pCO2) after extubation than nasal continuous positive airway pressure. Our aim was to clarify which of the two was superior.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a crossover randomized study to evaluate pCO2 level among 102 participants from July 2020 to June 2022. Intubated preterm and term neonates with arterial lines were randomly allocated to nHFOV-sNIPPV or sNIPPV-nHFOV sequences; their pCO2 levels were measured after 2 hours in each mode. Subgroup analyses were performed for preterm (gestational age <37 weeks) and very preterm (gestational age <32 weeks) neonates.

RESULTS

The mean gestational age (nHFOV-sNIPPV, 32.8 vs. sNIPPV-nHFOV, 33.5 weeks) and median birth weight (1,850 vs. 1,930 g) did not differ between the sequences. The mean ± standard deviation pCO2 level after nHFOV (38.7 ± 8.8 mm Hg) was significantly higher than that after sNIPPV (36.8 ± 10.2 mm Hg; mean difference: 1.9 mm Hg; 95% confidence interval: 0.3-3.4 mm Hg; treatment effect [p = 0.007] but no sequence [p = 0.92], period [p = 0.53], or carryover [p = 0.94] effects). However, the difference in pCO2 level between the sequences was not statistically significant in the subgroup analyses of preterm and very preterm neonates.

CONCLUSION

After neonatal extubation, the sNIPPV mode was associated with a lower pCO2 level than the nHFOV mode with no significant difference in preterm and very preterm neonates.

KEY POINTS

· Full noninvasive ventilation support is suggested in neonatal ventilation.. · pCO2 level in sNIPPV was lower than in nHFOV.. · No differences in pCO2 levels were observed in either preterm or very preterm neonates..

Blinding Assessments in Neonatal Ventilation Meta-Analyses: A Systematic Meta-Epidemiological Review

INTRODUCTION

Randomization and blinding are generally important in randomized trials. In neonatology, blinding of ventilation strategies is unfeasible if not impossible and we hypothesized that its importance has been overestimated, while the peculiarities of the neonatal patient and the specific outcomes have not been considered.

METHODS

For this meta-epidemiological review, we searched PubMed and Scopus databases in November 2023. We included all meta-analyses focusing on ventilation, published in past 5 years, and reporting either mortality or bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) as an outcome. We extracted the information about how the authors had analyzed risk of bias and evidence certainty.

RESULTS

We screened 494 abstracts and included 40 meta-analyses. Overall, 13 of the 40 reviews assessed blinding properly. Australian and European authors were most likely to perform correct assessment of the blinding (p = 0.03) and the use of RoB 2.0 tool was also associated with proper assessment (p < 0.001). In multivariate regression, the use of RoB 2.0 was the only factor associated with a proper assessment (Beta 0.57 [95% confidence interval: 0.29-0.99]). GRADE ratings were performed in 25 reviews, and the authors downgraded the evidence certainty due to risk of bias in 19 of these and none of these reviews performed the blinding assessment correctly.

CONCLUSION

In past neonatal evidence syntheses, the role of blinding has been mostly overestimated, which has led to downgrading of evidence certainty. Objective outcomes (such as mortality and BPD) do not need to be downgraded due to lack of blinding, as the knowledge of the received intervention does not influence the outcome assessment.

Effect of different noninvasive ventilation interfaces on the prevention of facial pressure injury: A network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of different noninvasive ventilation interfaces on preventing the facial pressure injury.

METHODS

This network meta-analysis was conducted following the PRISMA reporting guidelines. Seven electronic databases were systematically searched for randomised controlled trials about the comparative effectiveness of different interfaces in preventing facial pressure injury with noninvasive ventilation in adults and newborns from inception to June 2023. The acronym of PICOS was used and the keywords as well as inclusion/exclusion criteria were determined. Study selection and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. The Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool was used to assess the methodological quality.

RESULTS

A total of 78 randomised controlled trials involving 7,291 patients were included. The results of network meta-analysis showed that the effectiveness of the eight noninvasive ventilation interfaces on the prevention of facial pressure injury was in the order of: nasal cannula > full-face mask > rotation of nasal mask with nasal prongs > helmet > nasal mask > oronasal mask > nasal prongs > face mask. The use of full-face mask in adults and nasal cannula in newborns had the best effect on preventing the incidence of facial pressure injury.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of full-face mask in adults and nasal cannula in newborns had the most clinical advantage in preventing the incidence of facial pressure injury and were worthy promoting in clinical practice.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE

This study provides a certain theoretical basis for the selection of appropriate interface for patients with noninvasive ventilation. Clinical practitioners should choose the appropriate interfaces based on the patient's specific condition to reduce the incidence of facial pressure injury, enhance patient comfort, and improve the effectiveness of respiratory therapy.

Prongs or Mask for Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure in Neonates: Which One Is More Comfortable?

BACKGROUND

Nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) is a common mode of respiratory support in neonatal intensive care units. Our objective was to compare whether NCPAP given with nasal prongs compared with a nasal mask reduces the pain scores in preterm infants with respiratory distress.

METHODS

Preterm infants on NCPAP due to respiratory distress were included in the study. All infants received NCPAP via the Infant Flow SiPAP. The COVERS pain scale was used to score the infants' pain. Each infant was studied alternating between nasal prongs and a nasal mask. Heart rate, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, and transcutaneous CO2 (tcCO2) were monitored. Blood pressure and the infants' pain scores were determined every 30 minutes and the average of measurements was taken.

RESULTS

The median (interquartile range) values of pain scores, respiratory rates, oxygen saturations, tcCO2 levels, and systolic blood pressures differed significantly and favored the nasal mask.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that continuous positive airway pressure via a nasal mask leads to a significant reduction in pain scores without altering the respiratory parameters of babies. On the basis of this study, it is possible to conclude that NCPAP applied via nasal mask may be a good alternative to NCPAP applied via nasal prongs.

Systematic rotation versus continuous application of 'nasal prongs' or 'nasal mask' in preterm infants on nCPAP: a randomized controlled trial

To compare whether alternate rotation of nasal mask with nasal prongs every 8 h as compared to continuous use of either interface alone decreases the incidence of nasal injury in preterm infants receiving nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (nCPAP). This was an open-label, three-arm, stratified randomized controlled trial where infants < 35 weeks receiving nCPAP were randomized into three groups using two different nasal interfaces (continuous prongs group, continuous mask group, and rotation group). All infants were assessed for nasal injury six hours post-removal of nCPAP using grading suggested by Fischer et al. The nursing care was uniform across all three groups. Intention-to-treat analysis was done. Fifty-seven infants were enrolled, with nineteen in each group. The incidence of nasal injury was 42.1% vs. 47.4% vs. 68.4% in the rotation group, continuous mask, and continuous prongs groups, respectively (P = 0.228). On adjusted analysis (gestational age, birth weight, and duration of nCPAP therapy), the incidence of nasal injury was significantly less in the rotation group as compared to continuous prongs group (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR], 95% confidence interval [CI]; 0.10 [0.01-0.69], P = 0.02) and a trend towards lesser nasal injury as compared to continuous mask group (AOR, 95% CI; 0.15 [0.02-1.08], P = 0.06). However, there was no significant difference in incidence of nasal injuries between continuous prongs versus continuous mask group (P = 0.60). The need for surfactant, nCPAP failure rate, duration of nCPAP, and common neonatal co-morbidities were similar across all three groups.   Conclusion: Systematic rotation of nasal mask with nasal prongs significantly reduced nasal injury among preterm infants on nCPAP as compared to continuous use of nasal prongs alone without affecting nCPAP failure rate.   Trial registration: CTRI/2019/01/017320, registered on 31/01/2019. What is Known: • Use of nasal mask as an interface for nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure decreases nasal injury as compared to nasal prongs. What is New: • Rotation of nasal prongs and nasal mask interfaces alternately every 8 h may reduce the nasal injury even further as compared to either interface alone.

Non-invasive ventilatory support in neonates: An evidence-based update

Non-invasive ventilatory support (NIV) is considered the gold standard in the care of preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS). NIV from birth is superior to mechanical ventilation (MV) for the prevention of death or bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), with a number needed to treat between 25 and 35. Various methods of NIV are available, some of them extensively researched and with well proven efficacy, whilst others are needing further research. Nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) has replaced routine invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) for the initial stabilization and the treatment of RDS. Choosing the most suitable form of NIV and the most appropriate patient interface depends on several factors, including gestational age, underlying lung pathophysiology and the local facilities. In this review, we present the currently available evidence on NIV as primary ventilatory support to preventing intubation and for secondary ventilatory support, following extubation. We review nCPAP, nasal high-flow cannula, nasal intermittent positive airway pressure ventilation, bi-level positive airway pressure, nasal high-frequency oscillatory ventilation and nasal neurally adjusted ventilatory assist modes. We also discuss most suitable NIV devices and patient interfaces during resuscitation of the newborn in the delivery room.

RAM cannula versus short binasal prongs for nasal continuous positive airway pressure delivery in preterm infants: a randomized, noninferiority trial from low-middle-income country

To determine if RAM cannula is non-inferior to short binasal prongs (SBP) in providing nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS). In this randomized, open-label, noninferiority trial from a low-middle-income country, we enrolled 254 preterm infants (28-34 weeks gestational age) with RDS who needed CPAP as primary respiratory support. The eligible infants were randomized to either RAM cannula or SBP interface groups. The primary outcome was CPAP failure (defined as the need for intubation or non-invasive positive pressure ventilation) within 72 h of randomization. The noninferiority margin was defined as a 10% or less absolute difference in CPAP failure rates. The secondary outcomes included nasal trauma and adverse events. We analyzed by per-protocol (primary) and intention to treat. CPAP failure has been seen in 25 infants (19.7%) in the RAM cannula group versus 22 (17.3%) in the SBP group (RD -2.36%; 95% CI -11.9 to 7.2 [beyond inferiority margin]; p = 0.6). Moderate and severe nasal trauma was less in RAM cannula (2.4 vs. 8.7%; RR 0.27; 95% CI 0.08-0.95; p 0.028). Duration of CPAP was also significantly shorter in the RAM cannula group (MD -12.4 h; 95% CI -20.34 to -4.46, p 0.017). There were no differences in other adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

RAM cannula was not non-inferior to SBP in providing CPAP to preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered at Clinical Trial Registry of India (CTRI/2020/03/024097).

WHAT IS KNOWN

• RAM cannula is used for providing supplemental oxygen therapy. There is conflicting evidence on its efficacy in delivering CPAP support in preterm infants.

WHAT IS NEW

• RAM cannula was not non-inferior to SBP in providing CPAP to preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome. • RAM cannula causes less nasal trauma than short binasal prongs.

Masks versus prongs as interfaces for nasal continuous positive airway pressure in preterm infants

BACKGROUND

Nasal masks and nasal prongs are used as interfaces for providing continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) for preterm infants with or at risk of respiratory distress, either as primary support after birth or as ongoing support after endotracheal extubation from mechanical ventilation. It is unclear which type of interface is associated with lower rates of CPAP treatment failure, nasal trauma, or mortality and other morbidity.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of nasal masks versus nasal prongs for reducing CPAP treatment failure, nasal trauma, or mortality and other morbidity in newborn preterm infants with or at risk of respiratory distress.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was October 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing masks versus prongs as interfaces for delivery of nasal CPAP in newborn preterm infants (less than 37 weeks' gestation) with or at risk of respiratory distress.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. treatment failure, 2. all-cause mortality, and 3. neurodevelopmental impairment. Our secondary outcomes were 4. pneumothorax, 5. moderate-severe nasal trauma, 6. bronchopulmonary dysplasia, 7. duration of CPAP use, 8. duration of oxygen supplementation, 9. duration of hospitalisation, 10. patent ductus arteriosus receiving medical or surgical treatment, 11. necrotising enterocolitis, 12. severe intraventricular haemorrhage, and 13. severe retinopathy of prematurity. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 trials with 1604 infants. All trials were small (median number of participants 118). The trials occurred after 2001 in care facilities internationally, predominantly in India (eight trials). Most participants were preterm infants of 26 to 34 weeks' gestation who received nasal CPAP as the primary form of respiratory support after birth. The studied interfaces included commonly used commercially available masks and prongs. Lack of measures to blind caregivers or investigators was a potential source of performance and detection bias in all the trials. Meta-analyses suggested that use of masks compared with prongs may reduce CPAP treatment failure (risk ratio (RR) 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58 to 0.90; 8 trials, 919 infants; low certainty). The type of interface may not affect mortality prior to hospital discharge (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.22; 7 trials, 814 infants; low certainty). There are no data on neurodevelopmental impairment. Meta-analyses suggest that the choice of interface may result in little or no difference in the risk of pneumothorax (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.93; 5 trials, 625 infants; low certainty). Use of masks rather than prongs may reduce the risk of moderate-severe nasal injury (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.71; 10 trials, 1058 infants; low certainty). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect on bronchopulmonary dysplasia (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.03; 7 trials, 843 infants; very low certainty).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available trial data provide low-certainty evidence that use of masks compared with prongs as the nasal CPAP interface may reduce treatment failure and nasal injury, and may have little or no effect on mortality or the risk of pneumothorax in newborn preterm infants with or at risk of respiratory distress. The effect on bronchopulmonary dysplasia is very uncertain. Large, high-quality trials would be needed to provide evidence of sufficient validity and applicability to inform policy and practice.

Do newborn infants exhale through the CPAP system? Secondary analysis of a randomised cross-over trial

BACKGROUND

During nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) treatment in neonates, leakage is inevitable and can lead to reduced distending pressure in the lungs of the infant. In current practice, neither leakage nor expiratory flow is measured, which makes it difficult to assess if exhalation is through the device or entirely through leakages.

OBJECTIVE

To examine if infants treated with nCPAP exhale through the CPAP system.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Secondary data analyses from the ToNIL trial on leakages during nCPAP treatment. We retrospectively examined respiratory curves for the 50 infants included in the trial, using NI LabVIEW 2015. Each infant was measured with both prongs and nasal masks. A flow recording was classified as exhalation through the system if more than 50% of all expirations showed reverse flow, each for a minimum duration of 0.1 s.

PATIENTS

50 infants were included, born with a mean gestational age (GA) of 34 weeks, median birth weight of 1948 g and mean age at measurement 6.5 days. Inclusion criteria were CPAP treatment and a postmenstrual age (PMA) of 28-42 weeks.

RESULTS

In our measurements, 32/50 infants exhaled through the CPAP system in at least one recording with either nasal mask or prongs. Leakages exceeding 0.3 L/min were seen in 97/100 recordings.

CONCLUSIONS

During nCPAP treatment, infants can exhale through the CPAP system and leakage was common. Measuring expiratory flows and leakages in clinical settings could be valuable in optimising CPAP treatment of infants.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03586856.

AK, Razak A, Trevisanuto D. Nasal Cannula with Long and Narrow Tubing for Non-Invasive Respiratory Support in Preterm Neonates: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Cannulas with long and narrow tubing (CLNT) are increasingly being used as an interface for noninvasive respiratory support (NRS) in preterm neonates; however, their efficacy compared to commonly used nasal interfaces such as short binasal prongs (SBP) and nasal masks (NM) has not been widely studied. Material and Methods: Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, Health Technology Assessment Database, and Web of Science were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies investigating the efficacy of CLNT compared to SBP or NM in preterm neonates requiring NRS for primary respiratory and post-extubation support. A random-effects meta-analysis was used for data synthesis. Results: Three RCTs and three observational studies were included. Clinical benefit or harm could not be ruled out for the outcome of need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) for CLNT versus SBP or NM [relative risk (RR) 1.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61–3.04, certainty of evidence (CoE) low]. The results were also inconclusive for the outcome of treatment failure [RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.48–3.01, CoE very low]. Oropharyngeal pressure transmission was possibly lower with CLNT compared to other interfaces [MD −1.84 cm H20, 95% CI −3.12 to −0.56, CoE very low]. Clinical benefit or harm could not be excluded with CLNT compared to SBP or NM for the outcomes of duration of IMV, nasal trauma, receipt of surfactant, air leak, and NRS duration. Conclusion: Very low to low CoE and statistically nonsignificant results for the clinical outcomes precluded us from making any reasonable conclusions; however, the use of CLNT as an NRS interface, compared to SBP or NM, possibly transmits lower oropharyngeal pressures. We suggest adequately powered multicentric RCTs to evaluate the efficacy of CLNT when compared to other interfaces.

Patient-Ventilator Synchrony in Extremely Premature Neonates during Non-Invasive Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist or Synchronized Intermittent Positive Airway Pressure: A Randomized Crossover Pilot Trial

INTRODUCTION

Synchronization of non-invasive ventilation is challenging in extremely premature infants. We compared patient-ventilator synchrony between non-invasive neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NIV-NAVA) using transdiaphragmatic (Edi) catheter and synchronized intermittent positive airway pressure (SiPAP) using an abdominal trigger.

METHODS

This study was a monocentric, randomized, crossover trial in premature infants born before 28 weeks of gestation, aged 3 days or more, and below 32 weeks postmenstrual age. NIV-NAVA and SiPAP were applied in a random order for 2 h with analysis of data from the second hour. The primary outcome was the asynchrony index.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients were included (median [IQR] gestational age at birth 25.6 (25.3-26.4) weeks, median [IQR] birth weight 755 [680-824] g, median [IQR] postnatal age 26.5 [19.8-33.8] days). The median (IQR) asynchrony index was significantly lower in NIV-NAVA versus SiPAP (49.9% [44.1-52.6] vs. 85.8% [74.2-90.9], p < 0.001). Ineffective efforts and auto-triggering were significantly less frequent in NIV-NAVA versus SiPAP (3.0% vs. 32.0% p < 0.001 and 10.0% vs. 26.6%, p = 0.004, respectively). Double triggering was significantly less frequent in SiPAP versus NIV-NAVA (0.0% vs. 9.0%, p < 0.001). No significant difference was observed for premature cycling and late cycling. Peak Edi and swing Edi were significantly lower in NIV-NAVA as compared to SiPAP (7.7 [6.1-9.9] vs. 11.0 [6.7-14.5] μV, p = 0.006; 5.4 [4.2-7.6] vs. 7.6 [4.3-10.8] μV, p = 0.007, respectively). No significant difference was observed between NIV-NAVA and SiPAP for heart rate, respiratory rate, COMFORTneo scores, apnoea, desaturations, or bradycardias.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

NIV-NAVA markedly improves patient-ventilator synchrony as compared to SiPAP in extremely premature infants.

2020 year in review: Neonatal pulmonology

Pediatric Pulmonology publishes original research, reviews, and case reports related to a wide range of children's respiratory disorders. This review summarizes the past year's publications in the topic area of neonatal pulmonology, in the context of selected literature from other journals relevant to the discipline.

Interface leakage during neonatal CPAP treatment: a randomised, cross-over trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine leakage for two neonatal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) interfaces and evaluate leak-corrective manoeuvres.

DESIGN

The ToNIL (Trial of NCPAP Interface Leakage) study was a randomised, clinical, cross-over trial with data collection between August 2018 and October 2019. The primary outcome was blinded to the treating staff.

SETTING

One secondary, 8-bed neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) and three larger (>15 beds), academic NICU referral centres.

PATIENTS

Newborn infants with CPAP were screened (n=73), and those with stable spontaneous breathing, low oxygen requirement, postmenstrual age (PMA) over 28 weeks and no comorbidities were eligible. In total, 50 infants were included (median PMA 33 completed weeks).

INTERVENTIONS

Leakage was measured for both prongs and nasal mask, before and after leak-corrective manoeuvres. Interface application was performed in a randomised order by a nurse, blinded to the measured leakage.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

30 s average leakage, measured in litres per minute (LPM).

RESULTS

Analyses showed a significantly lower leakage (mean difference 0.86 LPM, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.65) with prongs (median 2.01 LPM, IQR 1.00-2.80) than nasal mask (median 2.45 LPM, IQR 0.99-5.11). Leak-corrective manoeuvres reduced leakage significantly for both prongs (median 1.22 LPM, IQR 0.54-1.87) and nasal mask (median 2.35 LPM, IQR 0.76-4.75).

CONCLUSIONS

Large leakages were common for both interfaces, less with prongs. Simple care manoeuvres reduced leakage for both interfaces. This is the first report of absolute leakage for nasal interfaces and should encourage further studies on leakage during CPAP treatment.

[Guidelines for neonatal skin management in the neonatal intensive care unit (2021)]

Neonates are easily suffering from local or systematic infections due to their vulnerable skin barrier function, which leads to the increasing risk of death. Therefore, it is important to protect neonatal skin integrity and prevent neonatal skin injury in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Based on Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) and current evidence, the guidelines for neonatal skin management in the NICU were developed to provide recommendations on routine skin care and prevention and treatment of iatrogenic skin injury of neonates for health care providers.

Current Resources for Evidence-Based Practice, May 2021

An extensive review of new resources to support the provision of evidence-based care for women and infants. The current column includes a discussion of the prenatal prediction of fetal macrosomia and commentaries on reviews focused on the effects of date palm and dill seed on labor outcomes and the current research available on SARS-CoV-2 and pregnancy outcomes.